TABLE OF CONTENTS

PREFACE 7
CHAPTER 1. TilE r-WSTEI~IOUS PREVALANCE OF JUDAISr>1 ':1

CHAPTER 2. FAILURES OF THE r.WDERN CHRONOLOGY 39

CHAPTER 3. THE VERIFICATION OF HISTORY \VITII ALGEBRA 53

CHAPTER 4. LEGENDS OF "ANCIENT" GREECE 69

CHAl'TEn S. FROM ROr-IULUS TO 1'1-IE MiDDLE AGES 95

CHAPTI:I{ 6. VISIBLE FE,\TURES OF THE MIDDLE AGES III

CHAPTER 7. EGYPT'S MEDIEVAL ALCIlEf\W 123

CHAPTER 8. WHAT THE PYRAlIo'liDS SAY 141

CHAPTER 9. ';DARK AGES" AND NOMADS 161

CHAPTER 10. THE ~NONGOL YOKE" IN RUSSIA 181

CHAPTER 11. THE CHINESE VARIANT OF HISTORY 199

CHAPTER 12. HISTORY IN THE PAGES OF TI-I£ BIBLE 221

CHAPTER 13. THAT TO WHICII OUR ANCESTORS PRAYED 251

CHAPTER 14. COI\H.ION FEATURES OF AN EMPIRE 271

CHAPTER 15. THE VERTICAL LINE OF 1f\'IPERIAL AL:THORITV 797

CHAPTER 16. MONEY FOR THE EMPIRE 321

CHAPTER 17. THE Ef-IPIRE'S HEIRS 151

CHAPTER 18, TilE BIRTH OF GOD INCARNATE 375

CHAPTER 19, IN TilE SIIADOW OF TilE CROSS '-i93

CHAPTER 20. MANKIND'S DISPLACED f'.'1 EMORY 405

APPENDIX:
1. TilE DISCOVERY OF DANTE 429
2. HISTORY'S "fLYING DUTCIlj\'lEW 447
3. TI-IE PERCEPTION OF OPEN-ENDED TIf-1E 465

488
PREFACE -.o==
PREFACE

In William Shakespeare's tragedy, "Othello", there is a riddle:

what religion does Othello profess? Desdemona says directly:

By heaven, you do me wrong ...

as I am a Christian!

But here the frank and honest Othello seems to be hiding

something. It is assumed today that he, a black·skinned Moor,
must be a Moslem, or at least descendent of Moslems. According
to traditional history, there really is no other alternative.
Othello, before he ends his life in suicide, recalls:

... And say besides, that in Aleppo once,

Where a malignant and a turban'd Turk
Beat a Venetian and traduced the state,
I took by the throat the circumcised dog,
And smote him, thus.
(Stabs himself)

That is, according to contemporary ideas, Islam must already

have been in the world, since some kind of "circumcised dog" in a
turban had fought with the Venetian in Aleppo.
Meanwhile, still rather recently (in historical time) the military
personnel of many countries have worn turbans. And circumcision,
as it will be shown in our book, is a most complex phenomenon, one
characteristic of a definite stage in all of human culture.
Thus it is impossible to understand who Othello "is" in terms
of faith, and it is not clear why he calls the Turk a dog. But it is
not worth accusing Shakespeare of a mistake. Not only he, but also
the English in general up to the 171h century did not mention
anywhere in written sources the words: "Moslem, Islam, Koran,

7
minaret, muezzin, hijra, Caaba". The full significance of this is that
they did not know anything of them. But, as you know, the sons
of Albion had already visited the corners of the globe and would
have known of these if they had existed. These words clearly
were unknow1I to Shakespeare as well as to both Francis Bacon
and other great Englishmen of that era.
They were similarly unknown as well to the Italian writer
Giraldi Cinthio, upon whose novella the "Moor of Venice" (the
"Hecatommithi" collection or "One Hundred Tales". 1566)
Shakespeare based his masterpiece.
So, how could Othello have not been a Moslem?
The riddle of Othello grows into one of the cardinal questions
connected with medieval times, when modern nations, states and
religions were being born.
Our book is devoted to this era. Scientific facts are collected
in it that prove that, up until now, the predominant historical
conception has been Utopian. It was built on false premises, by
means of an artificially constructed chronology. A multitude of
evidence points to the fact that all "ancient" manuscri pts are literary
works of the 15th· 16th centuries. and that there never was in
reality any "ancient" Rome and Greece as history teaches us.
We have collected the conclusions of dozens of scientists from
various countries that the most ancient monuments of mankind,
the pyramids of Egypt, were erected in the period between the 11
and 18'1> centuries of our OW1I era.
The processing of written sources on a computer, with a
comparative analysis of their authenticity, and the other newest
methods of the study of history, which have been found by scientists,
supports the contention that in the 13 - 14 Lh centuries of our era,
the first world war in history broke out. It ended with the
formation of a colossal empire with a capital in Istanbul, which at
that time was called Jerusalem. Its territory included a large part
of Europe, Asia, and all of the civilized regions of Africa and
Japan. There is good reason to say that the Aztec civilization was
also included within the Empire.
Its subjects named their country "Israel", and practiced that
religion which is, more or less, that presented in the Old Testament.
They named their faith catholic.
Having existed for 70-80 years, the empire broke up. The violent

8
creation of states began and, along with this, the formation of peoples
and nations in the modern sense of these words. An objective political
need thus arose for the creation of each one's own history, in the
context of one common history ~ that of an empire. It was neccssary
to find or to create historical roots appropriate for one's own
antiquity, which was not the same antiquity as that of neighboring
countries. In which connection, the morc deeply these roots went
into the centuries, the more legitimate both those roots and those of
the other rulers looked in the eyes of the subjects. It was as if their
authority had been sanctified by the centuries.
And then the primary framework of modern historiography
was invented. A hunt was launched for manuscri pts which cou ld
be plausibly declared ancient. The main body of sources for the
history of antiquity thus appeared in two centuries - the 15th and
16th. How this happened is well known not only to critics of
traditional historiography, but also to the traditionalisl'i themselves.
The ancient manuscri pts appeared according to a scheme which
is easily seen in the exam pic of onc of the brightest forgers of that
time, Poggio Bracciolilli. He, an author of historical and moralistic
books, was in the full sense of the word the dominant influence of
his century. Many found it reasonable to characterize the first half
of the Italian 15th Century as Poggio's century. Florence erected a
statue to him which \Vas carved by the great sculptor Donatello.
With the cooperation of the Florentine scholar and book
collector Niccolo Niccoli, Paggio Bracciolini established a kind of
permanent workshop specialiZing in ancient literature and attracted
a whole series of collaborators and partners to the business.
Poggio Bracciolini and Bartolomeo di rvlontepulciano made
the first of their "finds. in the era of the Council of Constance. [n
a forgotten, damp tower of the St. Gall monastery, in which a
prisoner would not survive even three days, they chanced "to find",
safe and sound, a heap of ancient manuscri pts: essays by QUintilian,
Valerius Flaccus, Asconjus Pedianus, Nonius Marccllus, Probus and
others. After some time, Bracciolini supposedly discovered fragments
"from Petronius" and "the Bucolic,;" of Calpurnius.
Poggio's clients were the Medici, the aristocratic families of
England, the House of the Dukes of Burgundy, Cardinal Orsini,
Colonus, the wealthy such as Bartholomeo de Bardis, and various
universities. He grew very rich from "ancient" manuscri pts.

9
 One would think it was impossible to forge archaeological
finds. But one can find just that which is needed and there
where it is needed.
The excavations of Herculaneum began in 1711, and in 1748,
the excavations at Pompeii. They were of a frankly commercial
nature. There was no attempt at what we would call serious research
involved. The first excavations in Athens were made by the English
.Society of Amateurs" in 1743-1751. It was, as its name implied,
literally a society of amateurs, and it is not seemly to speak of the
scientific level of the excavations it undertook. But even this
does not go to the core of the problem: The archaeological expeditions
which followed deliberately, purposefully destroyed all the
discoveries that contradicted the established conception of what
"history" had been and involved. In the best case, they declared
incongruous discoveries to be forgeries.
Sculptors also created a supposedly ancient history. It is well
known that some of them buried statues of their own creation in
the ground and then, several years later, informed the world that
they found in their own vegetable gardens the imperishable works
of the ancient masters.
The history of Russia and China is full of distortions and
fictions. For political and many other reasons, legends were
constructed around the Tatar Mongolian yoke in Russia and the
centuries old struggle with the Huns in China.' Both of these arc
simply untrue. And so, we shall try to explain in the pages of this
book what it was in fact and why the Great Wall was built in
China in the 15th and 16th centuries.
The high-minded direction of traditional European history
was developed in the 16th-17th centuries, in the era of the
Reformation and the Counter-Reformation.
The slogan of Nicolo Machiavelli, "The end justifies the means"
and the appeal of Martin Luther, "He who is not with us is against
us" became the main princi pies of the greatest historians of that
time. The originator of our modern chronology, Joseph Scaliger
(Bordone), brought up by his philosopher father (who was Henry
IV Bourbon's court chronicler) with the notion that "paper will
endure all, provided that it is beautiful", was, follOWing his master,
first a Catholic, then a Huguenot. He composed a "continuous"
chronology of the French royal dynasties, in order to legitimatize

10
and perpetuate the rights of the Bourbons, who had destroyed the
previous Valois dynasty. All the rest of world history was called
upon only to serve· as a background for this purpose.
The Austrian Cuspinian (Johann Spiesheimer) carried out the
same work for the Hapsburgs, deriving their uninterrupted
genealogy from Julius Caesar. The history of Great Britain in the
editions of the father and son lords-chancellor Bacon became the
most "pseudo-scientific", which were provided moreover with
brilliant "PR" in the form of Shakespeare's narrative plays. The
peaceful unification of England and Scotland under the crown of
the new Scottish dynasty of the Stuarts predetermined also an
"uninterrupted legitimate" history of the dynastic replacement of
Scottish rulers over 1,200 years.
The Roman Catholic Church, concerned for the preservation
of its political influence, undertook the creation of a pseudo-
scientific "worldwide secular history"; the most active partici pation
in which was that of the Jesuit, Dionysius Petavius. The adoption
in Europe of a modern chronology by a decision of the 1563 Council
of Trent became an important turning point - only in this year was
it declared that it would soon be 1,563 years since the birth of
Christ, and all sources which contradicted this were ordered to be
burnt. At the same time, the "Book of Popes" also appeared which
recorded somehow an uninterrupted succession of the Roman Popes
from the 4th through the 9th centuries (to Pope Nicholas O.
Even business created a modern historical tradition. From
the middle of the 15th century, by the efforts most of the Florentine
Medici bankers, history became the object of an extremely profitable
business - starting with "holy relics" and concluding with "ancient
manuscri pts". One most glaring example is the" Donation of
Constantine", the forgery of which Lorenzo Valla proved right in
the middle of the 15th century.
At this time an important event in civilization occurs - the
appearance of printing, which stimulates the ullsatisfied market
demand for books. Where there is demand, there will soon be
supplies. An abundance of just discovered "ancient" manuscripts
and chronicles thus quickly came into being, everywhere.
As a rule, these stop suddenly "somewhere in antiquity". A
typical example is the chronicle of the Saxon Grammatica, which
breaks off in t 185 and is discovered in 1514. This chronicle was

I1
subsequently incorporated into the foundation of the history of
the Scandinavian countries. A certain Gall Anonim wrote a similar
"ancient Polish" chronicle that ranges to 1113, and it was
discovered in that very same 16th century.
During the 16th and t 7th centuries, every European monarchy
had its own Court Chronicler. "History is rlecessary to the prince
of such that it allows him to most effectively rule his people".
Thus the founder of political science, Niccolo Machiavelli formulated
the thesis which defines even today the relationshi p of authority
to history.
Up to now, very rarely is the research of history frcc from
political sympathies and anti pathies and the wish to play up in a
positive sense the role and significance of the people among whom
the researchers count themselves. Thus, the brilliant Russian
mathematician and revisionist hjstorian, Anatoly Fomenko, attaches
all development of civilization to Slavic roots, and the Turkic writer
M. Agaji - to Turkic. The Western historians Otto Rahn, Guido
von List and many others have gone along the very same path.
Book authors suppose such an approach is in error. Their
position is that, until very recently, several centuries ago, people
did not consider tbemselves Turks or Russians, Jews or Frenchmen
in the present meaning of these definitions. There existed a period
when people were not divided by creed, inasmuch as being the
subjects of one empire, they professed one and the same religion -
monotheism. Protojudiasm became the starting position for the
creation of worldwide religions - the main driving force in
mankind's spiritual life for the centuries ahe.ad.
And this book, relying on reliable evidence of the past and on
those reconstructions which the critics of traditional historiography
suggest today, speak of the empire and its ideology.

12
THE MYSTERIOUS PREVALANCE
CHAPTER ONE
OF JUDAISM

The term "empire" (Latin imperium· authority) in modern

historical science connotes huge monarchist statcs. This correlates
with Persia and Rome, Byzantium and Russia, Britain and Spain,
and with various dynasties of European, Indian, South American
and Chinese monarchs.
Never and nowhere has this term been used for the designation
of any kind of Judaic state formation: history fails to record any case
in which small Semitic tribes, living at the meeting point of Africa
and Asia, created an empire of thei r own. In other words, conquered
neighboring and faraway countries, asserting their authority and
might by force of arms, imposing tribute on the vanquished.
In all the available sources it is firmly established that the Israelites
were constantly persecuted, that they practically at all times over the
mHlennia went from one bondage to another, from one enslavement to
another, nearly always being subservient to someone. At the same
time, however, in some mysterious way they managed to maintain
their collective uniqueness; often, in defiance of their own practicality,
they were true to the faith of the fathers and in any empire achieved
important positions in economics, politics and culture.
A mysterious and unique phenomenon of persecution and
tormentl Oppressed peoples there have been aplenty, but none of
them have been settled over vast territories· from Spain to India,
from Italy to Sweden. Only the Jews.
At the same time, it is striking that a phenomenon on such a scale
- the appearance in one country or another of huge groups of Jews·
has not been reflected in reliable historical sources. That is, there are
fully enough accounts of persecutions and pogroms, but records of
the forced or voluntary arrival of large masses of foreign peoples in
any country is not on record anywhere. Not one written account
exists other than the legendary Exodus of Moses.
How then do historians explain the wide distribution of the
Jews among other peoples? In all sorts of ways. Some say that this
13
is connected with the misSionary activity of their priests. But
those who believe this are extremely weakly acquainted with Judaism,
a closed religion which does not have a missionary tradition.
Others hold to the hypothesis of the commercial motivation
of the distribution of the Jews. They always were excellent
merchants, they reached anywhere they wanted with their goods,
settled in various countries and created their own communities.
This hypothesis also does not stand up to a critical analysis. The
thing is that trade in the Middle Ages, even more so in the early
centuries, is connected most of all with seafaring, and here the
historians for some reason are silent about brave Jewish captains.
There aren't any.
While examining the specific Judaic professional character in
Medieval Europe, you will discover, first of all, that their activities
were not of an essentially commercial, but financial nature. The
Jews are moneylenders, bankers, wholesalers. How were people with
such a specialization able to facilitate the unique phenome non of a
Jewish prevalence? There are no answers.
Any story about the history of one or the other Jewish community
today begins with the words, "according to legend", "it is thought
that", or "there is a tradition that". That is, there is a complete
absence of reliable fact concerning the arrival of the Jews. And this,
in our opinion, is unnatural. Even today people do not welcome
alien foreigners anywhere, considering them competitors in the labor
market; during times when people were sometime suffering and
dying from hunger, the absorption of significant numbers of newly
arrived immigrants could not have passed unnoticed.
Nonetheless, the Central Asian Moslems, the Germans, the
Swedes and all the rest, as we have noted, are all silent about the
arrival of Jews in their countries.
For that matter, a considerable of Jewish communities do not
think that they arrived from anywhere. Take, for example, the large
Bukhara Jewish community in Central Asia. There is no evidence -
direct or indirect - of the "arrival" or settlement of Jews in this hot
and arid land. On the contrary the local Jews declare that they
I

have been living in Central Asia always, or, in any case, that they
appeared there not later than the peoples who practice other religions.
Their declaration is reinforced by the full genetic, linguistic and
cultural unity of the Bukhara Jews with their neighbors. They are
distinguished only by faith.
14
 The genetic commonality of the Jewish population with the
native population of one country or another does not even evoke
surprise. It is not possible to genetically distinguish the Ethiopian
Jew from the Ethiopian, the Bukharan Jew from the Tajik, the Swedish
Jew from the Swede and so forth. On may presume that the Jews
were once joined by conjugal ties with the local population and as a
result have features similar to them. But, in the first place, Jewish
communities are extremely conservative on this question, and in the
second place, the many distinguishing signs of Semitic extraction,
according to the laws of genetics, must be maintained through 20
generations. But this is not the case in the examples observed.
Let us examine some results, on the basis of which
anthropologists challenge the presence of a Jewish race. In the
pamphlet, "The Race Question in Modern Science" (UNESCO),
Professor Juan Comas comes to this conclusion:
"Despite the view usually held, the Jewish people is racially
heterogeneous; its constant migrations and its relations - voluntary
or otherwise - with the widest variety of nations and peoples have
brought about such a degree of crossbreeding that the so-called
people of Israel can produce examples of traits typical of every
people. Compare the rubicund, sturdy, heavily-built Rotterdam Jew
with his co~religionist, say, in Salonika with gleaming eyes in a
sickly face and skinny, high-strung physique... We can assert that
Jews as a whole display as great a degree of morphological disparity
among themselves as could be found between members of two or
more different races".
As the researcher Harry Shapiro emphasizes:
"The wide range of variation between Jewish populations in
their physical characteristics and the diversity of the gene frequencies
of their blood groups render any unified racial classification for
them a contradiction in ternzs. For although modem racial theory
admits some degree of polymorphism or variation within a racial
group, it (that is, the theory) does not pennit distinctly different
groups to be identified as one. To do so would make the biological
purposes of racial classification (utile and the whole procedure
arbitrary and meaningless. Unfortunately, this subject is rarely wholly
divorced from non-biological consideratiotzs, and despite the evidence
efforts continue to be made to somehow segregate the Jews as a
distinct racial entity" ("The Jews: A Biological History").

15
 Maurice Fishberg, who holds the viewpoints of traditional
history, has noted the following:
"Beginning with Biblical evidence and traditions, it appears
that even in the begimling of the fonnation of the tribe of Israel
they were already composed of various racial elements... We find
in Asia Minor, Syria (Iud Palestine at that time many races the 4

Amorites, who were blondes, dolichocephalic, and tall; the Hittites, a

dark-complexioned race with dark hair, probably of Mongoloid type;
the Cushites, a Negroid race; and many others. With all these the
ancient Hebrews 'intemwrried, as con be seen in many passages in
lhe Bible" ("The Jews A Study of R."lce and Environment").
4

Continuing this thought, Arthur Koestler wrote:

"The prophets may thunder against "marrying daughters of a
strange god", yet the promiscuous lsmeiites were not deterred. and
their leaders rvere foremost in giving a bad example. Even the
first patriarch, Abraham, cohabited with I-Iagar, an Egyptiall; Joseph
married Arsenath, who was not only Egyptian but the daughter of
a priest; Moses married a M idianite, Z; pporah; Samson, the lewish
hero, a Philistine; King David's mother was from Moab. And the
Bible reports about Ki'lg Solomon: "But King Solomon loved many
strange wome'l, together with the daughter of Pharaoh, women of
the Moabites, Animonites, Edomites, Zidoniaus, and Hittites, Of
the nations conceming which the LORD said unto the childrell of
Israel: "Ve shallllol go in to them, neither shall they come in unto
you: for surely they will turn away YO/lr heart after their gods;
Solomon clave unto these in love" (I Kings, 11, 1-2).
Apparently, both the elite and the servants repeated the royal
example, the traditional historians think. Moreover, although
there also existed a prohibition against marrying gentile girls, it
was not extended to prisoners in war time. It would not be
worth dwelling on it if there were no persistent myth about a
Biblical people who preserved the purity of the race over all history.
(Arthur Koestler "The Thirteenth Tribe". Chapter 8).
Such is the generally accepted point of view. One would be
able to agree with it if not for the huge quantity of facts which say
that the fully pardonable weakness of the Jews for gentile girls
does not have any relation to the diversity of Jewish types. The
men loved the gentile girls of their own tribes whose special feature
consisted only of the fact that they, in contrast with the idolater

16
kinsmen were monotheists.
As regards the "migration of the Jews", medieval history has
brought to us well recorded facts of intra- European resettlements,
when as a result of various political intrigues groups of Jews were
resettled from long-inhabited places. Yes, they migrated, but the
reason lay not in their national affiliation. Then there weren't
even nations in the modern sense of this word. Moreover, what is
extremely important, the reference was never used for other groups
and strata of the population, that is, it was not a method for the
resolution of political, economic and other problems.
We will not find in the documents that have been preserved
one example of that era where people were resettled en masse to
other places. tn the best case, they robbed, raped and expelled.
Basically, mass executions and penal servitude were used. This
was simpler and quicker. The most striking example are the
persecutions in the 16th century of the French Huguenots, who
wished to receive divine grace directly from God, without the
mediation of Catholic clergy. Instead, they were accorded on 24
August 1572 a mass slaughter, well known in history as the Massacre
of St Bartholomew, or the Parisian Blood Wedding.
They began, however, to inveigh against and offend the Jews
much later. At first they just resettled them, with children and
familiars, with belongings and considerable money. And they
welcomed them at the new places, as we shall see in the follOWing
chapters, frequently with respect and esteem.
Let's examine the official history of a Jewish community tn
Sweden.
( 1000 -1500 JIThere are no Jews in Sweden.
;,
~ Queen Christina turns for help to the physician Benedict de
1645 Castro (Baruch Nehemias), the fi"t Jew in Sweden, the na-
me ofwhom history has preserved.
Baptism of Jews (four adults and eight children) at the
1681 Gennan Church in Stockholm in the presence of the king
and queen. Privileges granted to converts.
A small number of Jews living in Stockholm receives an
1685 orderto leave the country in 2weeks.

17
 Several consecutive decrees pUblished during the Swedish
Period of Liberty that are directed against the Jews. In
1718 -1772 Sweden, as in all of Europe, anumberofthe inhabi-tantsare
hostile toward the Jews and impede their settling in the
country.
Aaron Isaac is the fi~t 10 be living in Sweden allowed to
1774 practice his religion.

AJewish congregation is founded in Stockholm. The town of

Marstrand becomes a real refuge for foreigners where they
1775 were able to enjoy the opportunity to trade freely and prac-
tice their faith. The Je.nsh congregation existed until 1794.

We shall note an essential fact reflected in this table and

which is characteristic for the history of all European communities
of Jews. Well verified, non~legendary reports about the Jews begin
only in the 17 th century, in which connection the Jews turn out at
once to be in the immediate proximity of a country's rulers.
Reports of Jewish refugees and settlers are completely absent
until 1600. But as early as 1681, the solemn Baptism of 12 Jews
took place in the presence of the king and queen, tremendous
significance was attached to this event. And this at a time when
no one was interested in the fate of thousands and thousands of
people who belonged to any other religion, including Christian.
Why such an honor for the Jews?
As is seen from the table, in the 18th century a whole series of
laws is published which regulates relations with the Jews. In fact,
their necessity for the country is recognized. According to all the
canons of political science, similar laws can be evaluated as a
compromise of equals in strength of the hostile parties. To expect
similar political power from several hundred Jewish strangers who
have just settled is, at least, illogical.
Depending on sympathies for or anti pathies toward the Jews,
the authors of the works have explained and do explain this real
social phenomenon of them by Judaic positive or negative qualities.
The impression is created that these are not ordinary people who
possess advantages and disadvantages, but some kind of
extraordinary subjects, especially created (whether by divine, or

18
by dark forces). In any case, nowhere, unfortunately, is there a
clear and scientific explanation of this phenomenon, which actually
has a place in the history of European civilizations and in some of
the Oriental ones as well.
The uniqueness of the Judaic people is affinned, most of all, by
the authority of the world's religions and writings which could
make up an enormous library_ As asserted by theologians, their
faith in a single God and union with the Lord, fortified by a
number of rituals and rules and covenants allegedly played a
main role in the destiny of the Israelites. The fundamental features
of this faith lay too at the basis of Christianity and Islam, which
have united hundreds of millions of people in the entire world.
They have therefore, indirectly, played an important role in the
spiritual history of modern mankind.
In his book ''The Meaning of History", the views of the classical
Russian historian, Nikolai Berdyaev, who Virtually surrenders
scientific scepticism to religious mysticism as soon as it becomes a
Question of the Jews, is typical in this regard.
"To the Jews belonged an absolutely extraordinary role in the
origin of the perception of history, in an intense feeling of historic
destiny, namely the start of the 'historic' was introduced into the
worldwide life of mankind by the Jews.
"The Jews have a central significance in history. The Jewish
people are, predominately, a people of history, and in their historic
destiny is felt the inscrutability of the divine decrees. When a
materialistic sense of history attracted me, when I was trying to
test it for the destinies of peoples, it seemed to me that the historical
destiny of the Jewish people was the greatest obstacle for it, that,
from the point of view of the materialistic, this destiny is completely
inexplicable. It must be said that from any materialistic and
positive historic point of view, this people should have ceased to
exist long ago. Its existence is a strange, mysterious and wonderful
phenomenon, which shows that special designs are connected with
the destiny of these people. The survival of the Jewish people in
history, their resistance to destruction, their endurance as one of
the most ancient peoples of the world under completely
extraordinary conditions, that fateful role which these people play
in history - it all points to the particular, mystic foundations of
their historic destiny ... A particularly strained dramatic Quality
of history plays out around the destiny of the Jews".

19
 So Nikolay Berdyaev thinks, and such is the gist of practically
all positive arguments about the role of the people of Israel in the
development of mankind.
As regards the negative, then they are united by the notion of
"anti-Semitism". We shall dwell again on the basic features of this
social phenomenon. Meanwhile, let us say that, while trying to
understand its nature, various researchers created hundred of works.
They have searched for the roots of hatred toward the Jews in their
national character, in appearance, in customs and way of life, and in
devotion to their religion. Many authors have been struck by the
mysticism, by genetics and by heredity. Even so-called "instinctive"
anti-Semitism is considered as a serious scientific hypothesis. That
is, a hatred for the Jews which supposedly lies in the genes of the
anti-Semite.
The medieval Christian descri ption of Jews as "devils" is
documented at length in the work of the historian Joshua
Trachtenberg, "The Devil and the Jews" {Yale University Press,
New Haven, 194 o.
The rather well-known early 20th century historian, Flavien
Brenier, in his book "The Jews and the Talmud", wrote:
"Of all the tribal and religious questions which have been proposed
by history, there was not one more constant or more universal and
insoluble than the Jewish question. No matter how far we have dug
into the past, since the time of the settling of Jews among the other
tribes, we always meet then in an unceasing struggle with the peoples
who have taken them into their mjdst. Part of the ancient history
and all of the Middle Ages are filled with the repercussions of this
age-old struggle. At the present time, if this struggle between the
Jews on the one hand and the Christians and the Moslems on the
other, outwardly has obtained a semblance of fewer harsh words, then
it only is because Israel skillfully has concealed its, in the past almost
always straightforward and open, hatred. But Hft up any of these so
cunningly fabricated masks, and beneath the threat of national security,
material well-being, religious freedom or social structure of every people
you almost always will meet the Jew.
The Jews have caused anti-Christian persecutions in many
countries in order to appease the ancient hatred of this tribe toward
the servants of Christ. It is the Jews who have laid the fire under
the social structure, sowing in the world the ideas of collectivism
thanks to their agitators and Jewish theorists, the names of whom

20
are: Karl Marx, Lassalle and Singer in Germany; Neumayer, Adler
and Aaron Lieberman in Austria; Frieburg, Leon Frankel and
Haltmayer in France; James Cohen in Denmark; Dobrogeanu-Gherea
in Rumania; Coen, Lyon and Samuel Gampers in the United St.:1tes.
In the whole world, behind the sce'les o[ all attempts at moral
corruption in the area o[ literature and the arts, you again come
across the Jews. Finally, the Jews constantly serve as spies against
a/l states, which carelessly have given them refuge".
Professor Steiner in his article in the magazine, "Psychology
Today", (February 1973) notes:
"The triple appeal o[ the Jews [or per[ection (through 1/
Jewish Ethical Monotheism; 2/Christial1ity and islam; 3/messianic
socialism) gave birth to a deadly ill-will in relation to the Jews-in
the social consciousness. The Jews were transformed into the
"guilty conscience" in the history o[ Western civilization."
One can quote both the admirers of the Jews and their persecutors
for as long as one likes. The 20th century is especially rich in such
"research". It is marked by the savage outburst of Nazism, an extreme
expression of racism and xenophobia, and simultaneously - by the
vast sympathy of the worldwide community for the Jews, who had
endured the Holocaust, and with the support of the countries
victorious over Fascist Germany had created the state of Lsrael.
Such are the two basic stereotypes in the appraisal of Judaism
and its people. And it is extremely difficult to shake them, because
there is not one serious scientific work which explains the origin
and functionality of the world's Jews as a social phenomenon.
Meanwhile, life and history are full of facts which are contrary to
existing ideas.
Let's examine such a supposedly simple question as the
uniqueness of the Jewish people. So much has been said about it
both by their supporters and detractors, that, it would seem, there
isn't even any more to say here. However, we shall not be in a
hurry. There are serious reasons to think that at one time, earlier,
practically everyone was a Jcw. There has not becn such an
individual people in antiquity.
Evidencc for this, paradoxically, is conspicuous, although there
are those who will not consider it worth the eHort to see it. It is
enough at least to look at a map of the world and read the
descriptions of the customs, ceremonies and rituals of peoples which
inhabit the planet.

21
 The map shows graphically how widely Judaism was spread
among the most diverse peoples, located at times thousands of
kilometers from each other. They belong to various races, they
have different skin colors and outward appearances in which
evidence of Mongoloid, Negroid and other roots is obvious. They
speak in languages which have nothing in common with Hebrew.
Their ways of life, habits and art are radically different from those
peculiar to the Jews of Europe.
Nonetheless, they maintain that they are descendants of the
lost tribes of Israel, of those very same that. according to traditional
ideas, were dispersed throughout the whole world as a result of the
aggressive wars of neighbors and the devastation of their historic
homeland.
The legend about the lost tribes is interesting mainly due the
fact that it is the only rationale in the official history which explains
why Judaism is so extensive. It allows one to not reject the usual
dogma as regards Judaism, and in this is its value in the eyes of
the theologians. For them, the princi pal racial distinctions between
the Jews of the various continents do not have any meaning, and
the fact that people who belong supposedly to one nation could
not be so different from each another is irrelevant.
But here is what the facts say.
In the mountainous regions situated along both sides of the
border between India and Myanmar (formerly Burma) live the
Menashe (Shinlung) people. who number up to two million people.
These people look like the usual inhabitants of China or Burma.
But Menashe is the name of one of the twelve tribes of Israel.

22
 According to their version, the ancestors of these people were
exiled to Assyria in 722 B.C. with other tribes of Israel. Later
Assyria was conquered by Babylon (607 B.C.) which also was
subsequently conquered by Persia (457 S.C.) Greece conquered
Persia under Alexander the Great (331 S.C') In particular in this
period, the Menashe tribe was deported from Persia to Afghanistan
and other regions.

With the advent and expansion of Islam, many of them adopted

this religion. But during the whole time, a Torah scroll was
found with the tribe, kept with the elders and priests.
From Afghanistan, the route of the people lay to the east, to
China and the valley of the Wei River. This happened in 231
B.C. The tribe has religious holidays which are observed at the
same times as those of the western Jews.
A traditional song about crossing the Red Sea which was
written by the ancestors has been handed down from generation
to generation.

The Torah

23
 "We shall celebrate the Passover festival, we have crossed the
Red Sea. By night our way was lit by fire, by day a cloud showed
us the way. Enemies tried to catch us, the sea covered their chariots,
and they became food for the fishes. And when we experienced
thirst, the rock gave us water to drink".
In every village there was a priest, the name of whom was supposed
to be Aaron. Included in the duties of such priests was supervision
over the life of the villagers and the fulfillment of religious ceremonies.
The office of the priest was handed down.
All this is supported in the tale of a traveler who recently
visited Menashe.
Regardless of faith in the story teller, however, a scrupulous
precision of dates which somehow are known to the Menashe people
is striking. It is a shepherd's tribe, which has wandered over the
centuries from one place to another, utterly illiterate and not having
either calendar or the tradition to fix the birth dates of their own
children. Nonetheless, the shepherds know with precision to the
year the times of the Assyrian and Babylonian captivity, the period
of Alexander the Great's conquests and the date of their own
arrival on Chinese soil. Can it be so? Hardly. In our view, the
traveler decided for reinforcement of the impression to ascribe to
the shepherds their own knowledge. But the fact itself is enough
of a sensation, you see.
In that very same Burma, in the MilO tribe, which has not been
disturbed by numerous missionaries and has had no contact with
the Menashe people, is observed a great number of Jewish ceremonies
and rituals: circumcision, the Shabbat, various holidays, etc.
KASHMIR _
Between five and seven million people live in this region who
also consider themselves descendants of the lost tribes of Israel, although
all of them are Moslems. Here there are places with names of obviously
Judaic origin: Har Neva, Beit Peor, Pisga and others. This carries
over into men's and women's names, and also the names of some
villages. The Udu language used in this region includes a great number
of Hebrew words.
The priest Kltro in hjs book, "A General History of the Mughal
Empire" declares that the population of Kashmir is descendants of
the ancient Israelites. The Arab historian and traveler EI Bironi

24
made the following notation: "In the past, permission to enter Kashmir
was given only to Jews".
The priest Monstrat has said that during the times of Vasco da
Gama in the 15th Century, "all the inhabitants of this land are
people who have been living here since ancient times... they trace
their ancestry from the ancient Israelites. Their features, external
appearance, build, clothing, way of conducting business all show
that they are descendants of the ancient Jews". The people who live
in these places light candles before the start of the Sabbath, wear
curls (resembling forelocks), and beards; they also have the image of
the Star of David.

----J!Chiang Min people A Priest of Chiang Min tribe

(Photo: Thomas Torrancs) (Photo: Torrance in 1920's)

In the area of Kashmir which borders with Pakistan and is

called Yusmarg (Handwara), there lives a national group which
to this day calls itself Bnei Israel (the sons of Israel). Many
inhabitants of Kashmir say that Bnci Israel is an ancient Ilame for
all of the population of Kashmir.
Also in this region exists a legend about the fact that Jesus
Christ did not die on the cross, but reached the Kashmir Valley in
search of the lost ten tribes and lived there right up until his
death. The local population says that his grave is found here and
the inhabitants know where it is located.
In one of the small Kashmir villages, alongside the Wallar
Link, exists a belief that Moses himself is buried in this location.
Moreover, some believe that none other than King Solomon came

25
to the Kashmir Valley. Two historians - the Mullah Nadiri, who
wrote "The History of Kashmir", and Mullah Ahmad, the author of
"Events of Kashmir", did not doubt that the origin of the Kashmiri
people comes from the ancient Israelites.
THE PATHAN"-S ~

This society numbers nearly 15 million people, who live on the

territory of Persia, India, Pakistan and Afghanistan. As the Israeli
anthropologist Shalva Wei! notes, the Pathans have preserved a
tradition that their forefathers are all representatives of those same
lost ten tribes of Israel. Numerous Jewish traditions are observed
by these people to this day. For example, the Pathans circumcise
their children on the eighth day of life. The Pat hans have
something similar to the small Jewish Talit called a "Kafan". This
is a four-cornered covering, on the corners of which are tassels.

The Khan 0' Kalal. with his sons. Baluchistan, 1919

Photo Cout1esy 0' Baloch Circle

The Pathans honor Shabbat. For them, thjs day is a symbol of

rest; on Shabbat they do not work, they do not prepare food, and they
are not involved with housekeeping. Before each Shabbat, they bake
12 Challahs in order to glorify the Sabbath, as was done anciently.
The Pathans also have the tradition of Kosher. Thus, they
don't eat horse flesh or camel meat, which are very popular in the
region, but forbidden to any Jew. Many men bear the names Israel,
Samuel, etc. There are practically no such names in the world
around them.

26
 The Shield of David is almost in every home. The richest
inhabitants make it from valuable metals; those who are poorer
manage with simple wood. One there sees the Star o( David on
towers, schools, chains and bracelets. In Minerajan there are schools

Pathans In Ouetta, 8Sr1y 20th century

(Originsl photos appearsd In HAU 76, C 1994)

where these are attached to the doors or suspended above them.

Regardless of this, and at the same time, as a representative of
the Palhans personally reported to us, they relate to modern Jews
with extreme animosity. Such a turn-around.
yEMEN _
Historiographer Nehama C. Nallmoud wrote: ~There are several
ancient legends and modern theories about the arrival of Jews in
Yemen.
Most with a cursory knowledge of the Torah. are aware of the
visit of the Queeo of Shvah (Sheba) to King Shlomo (Solomon).
But there is a question that has never been answered: Where exactly
did she come from? The Ethiopian royal family, living just across a
hannel from Yemen, always claimed descent from the Queen of
Shvah. The killg's official title is the "Lion of Judah" for this reason.
However, the Yemenites have a legend that posits that when
the Queen of Shvah returned from her visit to Shlomo, she brought
back educated Jews (rom the Holy Land with the goal of educating

27
her child, thus establishing the first Jewish presence in the Arabian
peninsula, which includes Yemen ("The Jews of Yemen").
ETHIOPIA _
The Falasha lived in the country all the way to the latest
decades, another "lost" tribe of Israel. As the Czech African
researcher, Zdenek Polacek, testifies, up until the resettlement to

The Fe/ashes - The Origin Herbews

Israel the Falasha lived (and the rest of them still live) scattered
between the largest northern Ethiopian ethnic groups (the Amhara
and Tigrean) in the Begemdir and Tigray provinces.
The Falasha called themselves "The Home of Israel" (Beta Israel)
or in their native language of the Cushite group they have used the
self-designation of "Kayla". Generally the Falasha did not know
Hebrew. One may consider the "Sabbath Instructions" (Tehel-<lZe
Sen bet) as an original work of Falasha literature. In this book,
Shabbat is personified • it is understood as a female being, which
embodies a heavenly light. In it the legends that relate to Shabbat
are set forth in an engaging form.
The Judaism of the Falasha is peculiar. This has maintained a
number of elements of the first temple (such as the sacrifice of animals
and the institution of the priesthood). The Falasha didn't know of
either the Mishnah or the Talmud. A synagogue was in every village

28
or hamlet where at least one priest lived. Falasha priests (cahenat,
singular - caben) were descended from Aaron. The whole community
selected a candidate for the position of priest. According to the
instructions of the Torah, they circumcised (gizret) children on the
eighth day after birth,
ECUADOR _
As regards the South American Indians and their possible
relationshi p to the lost tribes of Israel, an article was published in
the Israeli newspaper "Maariv" (December 1974) with the follOWing
content:
"In 1587, the Jesuit Nicholas Delltsu was sent to South America
by the King of Spain for missionary purposes - to convert the Indians
to Christhmity. In Argentina, Nicholas discovered a people who bore
Jewish names, namely: Abraham, David, Moses and so forth. To the
question about whether they were circumcised, these people answered
thus: "Ycs, just like our ancestors", In this same region were found
stone knives used for circumcision. Sharpened stone knives are
mentioned also in the Bible as special instruments for completion of
the rite of circumcision, An Argentine tribe where a stone slab with
three commandments was found causes no less interest, "Do not

steal", "Do not lie" and "Do not kil1". One may assume that these
commandments are from the Old Testament, and that they appeared

29
in these lands before the arrival of the Spaniards.
In 1974, in this very same region were found round stone slabs
with menorahs (seven-IXlinted candlestick) on them; along the sides
of these menorahs, in the Aramaic language, was the inscri ption
"Passover". The Aramaic language, we recall, is a language of ancient
Israel.
Alongside the slab was found a long stone, in a shape which
resembles a brick, with an engraving of a shi p (the emblem of the
Zevulun tribe) and with engraved word 'Zipporah' <the name of
Moses' wife, and perhaps, the name of the shi p)".
Does this mean that Jews sailed here on a ship?
" ... Scientists think that this stone is nearly 3,000 years old".
It must be said that the problem of the South American Jewish
Indians has been occupying minds in Europe since as early as the
17th century. The Amsterdam rabbi Manasseh Ben Israel devoted
many years to it. A deeply religious man, he believed that there
existed on earth the mysterious Sabbatical river Sambation which
is mentioned in the Talmud. Its miraculous property is the fact
that it is rough, with rolling stones and absolutely insurmountable
on week days, but with the advent of the Sabbath rest it calms and
becomes quiet. The Jews liVing on that side of the Sambation have
no possibility of crossing the river, inasmuch as its would be a
violation of Shabbat, and they can only exchange words with
their fellow tribesmen on this side of the river, whenever it becomes
calm. The ancient historians Josephus Flavius ("The Judaic War")
and Pliny the Elder ("Natural History") wrote about the
Sambation.
Mannesah Ben Israel emphasized in his book that many
learned men believed that the ten tribes of Israel settled on the
other side of the river. He also quoted many authors, for example,
Josephus Flavius, who in his own works had maintained that
supposedly the Emperor Titus himself had seen this river.
Later, after a meeting of Manasseh with the missionary Antonio
de Montezinus, the rabbi finally was convinced that the American
Indians in particular are descendants of the 10 tribes of Israel.
Manasseh learned from Montezinus that in 1642, when the
latter was traveling in the mountains of Ecuador, four Indians met
him, who greeted him with the "Shema Israel" - "Hear, Israel, the
Lord is our God, the Lord is one".

30
 The traveler said that the Indians spoke with him in Hebrew
and called themselves the descendants of Reubin and Levi.
Ilere even Manasseh came to the conclusion that the American
Indians are the descendants of the lost tribes of Israel. On 23
December 1649, he wrote to John Drury, the Puritan divine:
"I think that the descendants of the ten tribes live not only in
America, but also around the whole world. These are those Jews
who have not seen the second temple; they, possibly, will be dispersed
until the prophecies of their reunification be realized".
JAPAN _
Traces of the influence of the lost tribes of Israel are found
even in Japan. The Japanese writer, Arimasa Kubo, has performed
special research ("The Israelites Came to Ancient japan") and came
to the conclusion: a great number of the local ceremonies testify.to
the fact that the jews arrived at some time on the territory of this
country and seWed here, Shinto, the traditional religion of the
Japanese, bears strikingly pronounced features of judaism. Arimasa
Kubo has collected extensive ethnographic material in support of
his conclusion.

Here are some of the writer's arguments.

The large Suwa-Taisha Shinto shrine is in Nagano prefecture.
The traditional Ontohsai festival is held here each year (when the
Japanese, as also the Jews, used the lunar calendar, the holiday was
held in March or April). During the festival there is a certain activity
which illustrates something very similar to the story of the sacrifice of
Isaac.
At Lhe festival, right up to the last century, the follOWing

31
happened: tbey tied a boy to a wooden column and they placed
him on a bamboo cover. A Shinto priest, holding a knife in the
hand, approached the boy and menacingly cut off a piece of the

upper part of the column. Suddenly a messenger (another priest)

approached the priest, and they set the boy free.
At this very festival the sacrifice of animals took place, in particular,
of 75 does. In ancient times in Japan there were no sheep, and this
may be the reason why in this practice they used does (the doe is a
kosher animal). Even in ancient times the tradition of bringing does
to the offering seemed strange, since the sacrifice of animals is not a
Shinto tradition.
Today the custom has been preserved symbolically to depict
how they intend to sacrifice the boy, and then let him go free:
there is a wooden column called "on ie-bashira", that signifies the
"sacrificial column".
Japanese religious "Yamabushi" priests put small black boxes
(tokin) on the forehead exactly the same as the Jews the phylactery.

32
This custom existed in Japan much earlier than Buddhism spread
through the country (the 17th century). The size of the tokin is
practically the same as the phylactery. The only difference is in the
shape: the Jewish phylactery is square; the Japanese tokin is round.
The Yamabushi has one more thing in the arsenal: a large sea
shell which he uses as a horn. This horn is reminiscent of the
Jewish shofar from a ram's horn. Even the sounds produced by
both instruments are similar to each other.
In Japan there is the legend of the "Tengu", a legendary being
who possesses supernatural capabilities. The essence of the legend
is: A Ninja, while carrying out the wishes of his master, goes looking
for Tengu in the mountains in order to receive the same capabilities.

Yamabushi with tolein and shofar

Tengu not only endows the Ninja with special powcrs, but also
gives him the "tora-no-maki" (a scroll of the torah). This "scroll of
the torah" is given to the Ninja as a very valuable, almost magical
book, which is capable of helping in any situation. The phrase
"tora-no-maki" has become a Japanese idiom and is Widely used to
the present day.
The clothing of the Israelite and Japanese priests is very similar
to C<1ch othcr. Marvin Tokayer, a rabbi who has lived in Japan for 10
years, has written: "The linen clothing which the Japanese Shinto
priests wear has the same shape as the linen clothing of the ancient
Israelite priests".

33
 The construction of a Japanese Shinto shrine is similar to the
construction of the Tent of Revelation in ancient Israel. The Tent
of the Revelation in ancient Israel consisted of two parts. The

first is the Sanctuary, the second is the Holy of Holies. The Japanese
Shinto Shrine also is divided into two parts. Only the Shinto
priests or special people have the right to enter the Sanctuary.
Priests only enter the Holy of Holies of Japanese shrines during
special festivals: precisely the same rules are found in the Bible.
Opposite a Japanese shrine usually there are two statues of lions,
known as "komainu". The sit on both sides of the entrance and play

The marlr on Herod's gate at JerusaJem (left) and tha crest of the
Imperial House of Japan (right)

the role of guards of the shrine. There was the very same tradition in
ancient Lsrael, too. Ln the temple of the Most High in Lsrael and in
the palace of King Solomon there were statues of lions (Melachin
(First Book of Kings) 7:36, 10: 9). Meanwhile, in ancient Japan in
general no lions were to be found.
The Japanese have a tradition of using salt for purificatioo and

34
consecration of something. Sometimes people sprinkle salt after the
presence nearby of an lffipleasant person. It is possible the ancient
Israelites had the velJ' same tradition. For example, when Abimelech

destroyed Shechem, he "sowed it with salt". (Book of Judges, Shoftim

9:45).
Shinto is a polytheistic religion, but Kubo is of the opinion
that at some time Shintoists believed in Yahweh.
"Amenominakanushi-no-kami" is considered to be the very first
Shinto god. The Japanese believe that he was born before all the
gods, lived in the center of the universe, had no form, was eternal
and, being the invisible creator of the universe, was the sole god.
In Japan, people have been using crests which look like the
Shield of David since very old days. For instance, Asa-no-ha
crest, which also resembles the Shield of David, has been used
widely as symbles for clothes since about Kamakura-era (the 12-
14th century C.E.). And Kagome crest was used by Komiya clan
and Magaribuchi clan, etc., who are descendants of emperor Seiwa
(the 9th century C.E.).
We can also see the symbols which resemble the Shield of
David as rcgalias of several cities of Japan. The city regalias of
Nishi-no-miya city (Hyogo prefecture), Oomuta city (Fukuoka),
Otaru city (Hokkaido), Wakkanai city (Hokkaido), and
Fukuchiyama city (Kyoto) are all in the shape of 6 edged star, and
resemble the Shield of David very much.
There was a time when even the Tatars, who have lived since
ancient times on the territory of modern Russia and who have

35
 Painter - D.Zs/sletdinov
Reconstruction S.Su$lovs (Property of IAKA 'Pol'Olshe")

practiced Islam for several centuries attributed their origin to the

Israelites.
in 1664-65, Nicolaas Witsen made a journey from Europe to
Muscovy. His notes have been preserved. In them it states:
"...Today I leamed that the [NogaiJ Tatars east of Kazan are
similar in many ways to the Jews; undoubtedly, these are the formerly
driven out tribes [of Israel J who kept the ancient customs: they
do not eat pork, they perform sacrifices according to the ancient
custom, their priests receive a tithe, they administer justice in the
very same way and become lmpure in the same way, they perform
circumcision, they have a skimia according to the old custom (a
Skimia is a portable shrine the Jews have), and also have the psalms
of David and the book of Moses in everyday life, and they even
say that they come from the Jews. The same people live on the
Crimean, they fled from the same things, and the remnants of
Judaism are observed in them, too; one of their clan told us this,
who is in service here".
The distinct traces of the influence of Judaic monotheism on
the whole space of Eurasia arc found in many documents of the
36
M;ddle Ages.
There is the Hun Guyuk's letter to the Roman Popc, written in
the Persian language and discovered in 1920 in a Vatican archive.
(Giovanni eli Plano Carpini. "History of the Mongols". Chapter
9. Note 217. Moscow, 1957):
"By the force of the eternal sky (we) arc the Dalai-Khan of all
the great people; our dictate (these lines were written in a Turkic
language). This is the dictate. sent to the great Pope, so that he
know and understand it... You have sent me such words: 'You
have captured the whole area of the Majar (Hungarians) and
Kiristan <Christian); I am astonished. What need was there for
this, tell us? "They have sent to both Genghis Khan and the Kaan
hear the dictate of God. But these people did not obey the dictate
of God. Those of whom you are speaking even held the great
council, they showed themselves to be arrogant and they killed
our ambassadors ... By the force of the eternal God the peq:ple were
killed and crushed on these lands...
By the force of God all the lands, starting from those where
the sun rises, and ending there where it sets, have been granted to
us. Besides the dictate of God, thus '10 on.e can do anything".
The god of the Khan Guyuk is indistinguishable from Yahweh,
the god of the Old Testament. The tone of the letter itself, the
turn of speech, the dictates of the god, where to go and what to do
is all as if it were taken from the Bible. Khan Guyuk in faith is aJl
Old Testament monotheist - an Israelite.
Even Carpini in fact supports it. He writes:
"§ I. On the Tatar's veneration of a god.
I. They believe in a single God, whom they recognize as the
creator of all t!lotis seen and unseen, and they also recognize him
as the creator of bliss in this world, and too of sorrow, however,
they do not h01l0r him with prayers or with praise or with any
kind of devotion".
Modern historians think Carpini's composition about the
Mongol-Tatars merits full trust, but here they proclaim the paragraph
"on the Tatar's veneration of a god" as a mistake. The hard rule
falls into place here: everything that does not correspond to
traditional concepts is in error. But about this in the next chapters.
So, the geographical prevalence of those or the other customs

37
and rituals of Judaism is colossal. Consequently, either the Israelites
are the ancestors of nearly all mankind, or there never existed an
Israelite people.
The words of rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, a contemporary theologian
and spiritual mentor of Russia's Jews, are recalled:
"Jewry is not a nationality. It is a metaphorical essence of
people who bear a defined mission, called upon to become an
instrument for the execution and realization of the divine plan"
("Exodus" magazine, 2003).
Adin Steinsaltz is resolving the problem of the present
definition of the Jews along a material line using a comparison of
the Jews with noblemen. Nobility has been and is hereditary
conferred for any kind of services. Jewry follows the very same
paths. Some Jews are defined according to maternal lines, others
go through a rite of dedication and conversion.
In our opinion, a comparison of Jews with nobility has a
profound historic meaning, much more profound than Adin
Steinsaltz himself thinks.

38
FAILURES
CHAPTER TWO
OF THE MODERN CHRONOLOGY

The authentic, uncontrived history of Judaism has been hidden

from us by a wall of legends and myths which have come to assume,
with the passage of time, the appearance of rigorous, scientifically
factual authority. Therefore, before onc can reconstruct it, it is
necessary to understand the actual condition of modern
historiography. In this endeavor, the research of those scientists
who can regard it critically may help us greatly. But there have
been few such scientists throughout the centuries.
But most. of all, it is not out of place to recall that the ancient
history known to us today is a written history, that is, a history based
on written documents. There are also other sources: drawings on
rocks or pyramids, steles or tombs, oral traditions, maps, coins, and
objects of cults and family life. But they take on meaning oidy after
they are connected to the writLen evidence of the past.
When history tells us that Alexander the Great conquered half
the world, this means only that it is written thus in the sources
which have come down to us. And nothjng morc. With respect to
this, we unfortunately do not have a chronicle written by the
Maccdonian's contemporaries and witnesses of the events involved.
We have in our hands literary accounts - legends and tales, created
many centuries after the military leader. How authentic they are,
no one knows and, unfortunately, will never know.
Undoubtedly, some kind of reality lies at the heart of the
written documents. However, one and the same real event can
have been reflected in several different manuscri pts, and reflected
vcry differently. Sometimes these differences can be so great that,
at first glance, it is impossible to believe that two descri ptions of
it before us record one and the same event.
Moreover, one and thc same hero of a story can be mentioned
several times under various names. You sec, in antiquity people
often had many names - nicknames and titles. Many of what we
now consider to have been names, in actual fact, are magnificent
39
adjectives of the type "Brilliant", "Purple Nosed", "Great" and the
like. As recorded on the pages of various manuscri pts, real people
were sometimes even assigned new "names", differing from those
by which their contemporaries also knew them. This may have
been the consequence of mistakes, confusion, and incorrect
translations of texts.
It is necessary to speak especially about incorrect translations.
These often playa decisive role in the comprehension of the legends
and the sacred books. One of the most typical examples is a central
event of the Old Testament: The exodus of the Israelites from
Egypt. In the first five books of Moses, it states in Hebrew that
the Israelites crossed the Reed Sea, not the Red Sea (as it is
incorrectly translated by modcrn Bibles in other languages). If
one suspends the question of whether in fact there had ever been
an Exodus from Egypt at all, and examines the possibility of this
having bappened critically, then the conclusions which follow
from thjs uodo the account. You see, a reed has never grown, and
no reed will ever grow in salty sea water. Consequently, the
Israelites, when they were saved from Pharaoh's pursuing troops,
crossed not a sea, but some kind of huge swamp in which the
heavy chariots of the enemy gal stuck and sank. But then it
remains to be established where this might have been located,
inasmuch as in the desolate Sinai there were not, and can hardly
have been, vel' many significant reed beds.
Incorrect translations, made, most likely, knowingly, are not
exposed to doubt anywhere, and the overwhelming majority of
Christians are not suspicious of them.
It is very important to note that, over the centuries, names
(both of geographic features and those by which peoples called
themselves) changed their meanings. One and the same word
came, in various historic eras, to denote entirely different ideas.
Moreover, many geographic names were moved around the map.
They became fixed only with the advent of printing, when it became
possible to produce many identical copies of one and the same
map. Once the names had "floated" around the maps, their
significance became nearly nil.
Significant difficulties accompany attempts of correct
geographic localization of many ancient events. For example, Naples,
that is "new town" in translation, is present in the ancient chronicles
in several seemingly different guises:
40
 - Naples (in Italy, which exists even today);
- Carthage (in translation this also means "new town");
- Naples in Palestine;
- The Scythian Naples and so on.
Today it is assumed that the well-known "ancient Babylon"
was located in modern Mesopotamia. However, some medieval
texts adhere to a contrary opinion. For example, the well-known
"Serbian Alexandria" places Babylon in Egypt. In that same place,
i.e., in Egypt, Alexander the Great supposedly died, although,
according to today's version, this happened in Mesopotamia.
The titles and names in the ancient texts qUite often were
used "without vocalizations", that is, without vowels, only in the
form of a "skeleton" of consonants, and this relates not only to
Hebrew. With the passage of time, the vowels were forgotten and
blurred into other vowells. As a result, the most diverse
vocalizations arose, which radically changed the meaning of the
text.
Therefore, the interpretation of the written documents on hand
was and remains arbitrary. There are few who know this besides
specialists. And if it is not being changed today, before our eyes,
then it only is because it has been fixed in the histori'c works
owing to tradition and the authority of prominent historians.
The most serious problems are connected with the chronology.
The majority of modern dating methods are based on the
princi pie of the comparison of a given document with the data, the
dating of which is considered already well known. At the heart
of this lies the Roman chronology. As the well-known contemporary
American chronologist, Elias Bickerman, writes, "all ancient
chronology datings can be linked to our calendar via <;lirect or
indirect synchronisms with the Roman dates".
Today's version of the chronology of antiquity goes back to
the works of Joseph Scaliger (1540-1609) and Dionysius Petavius
(Petavia) (1583-1652). However, as Elias Bickerman notes,
"There has been no chronological research ever conducted that
could be cal1ed exhaustive and conforming to modern standards.
"Therefore, it would be more correct to call the chronology
accepted today "the Scaliger-Petavius version. "And this version
was not the only one. Elias Bickerman generally speaks with
regret about "the chaos of medieval datings".
At the heart of the chronology is laid the interpretation of the
4I
numerical reports collected in the Bible, and the astronomical
calendar calculations, the errors of which at that time they still
were unable to appreciate. And the significance of these errors is
sometimes huge - in the hundreds and even thousands of years.
Moreover, the "secular chronology" which arose later is based
fully on the church chronology. Thus, Elias Bickerman notes: "The
Christian historians have made a secular chronography serve
ecclesial history ... " (Bickerman Elias J. Chronology of the Ancienl
World. London, 1969).
Just how much can one trust the numerical reports ciled in
the Bible? Judge for yourself. The date of the "world's creation",
for example, varies in different documents within signific<~nt
bounds. There are the following "reference points", from which the
whole chronology was developed:
5969 (Antiochian, Theophilus);
5508 (Byzantine, the so-called Constantinople);
5493 (Alexandrian, the Annian era, and also 5472 or 5624);
4004 (Usher, Hebraic; in the opinion of James Usher (Usseriu$,
Asher) the world was created in the morning on Sunday, 23 October
4004 B.C. A fantastic precision!;
5872 (the so-called dating of the 70 interpreters, or 70
translators of the Bible);
4700 (Samarian);
3761 <Judaic);
3941 (Hieronymus);
5500 (Hi ppolytus and Sextus Julius Africanus);
5199 (Eusebius of Caesarea);
5551 (Augustine).
Altogether nearly 200 different versions of "dales of the world's
creation" have been turned out. One can choose any. In which
connection, the fluctuation of the dates' reference point is 2, I00 years.
The question "of the correct date of the world's creation" is
not scholastic from here. The point is that a huge number of
documents date the event described with years "from the world's
creation". And if "the creation" is so undefined, then the dating of
the documents must diverge widely indeed.
Not many know that Scaliger and PetavillS brought the
chronology to completion, to "absolutely precise" dates (year, month,
date and sometimes even hour of the day) of all the main events in
the history of mankind. Contemporary monographs and text books
42
cite, as a rule, only the years of the events according to Scaliger-
Petavius, leaving out the month, date and hour of the day. The
historians are cunning, correcting the traditional chronology of
the founding fathers. However, they are not able to deal with it
any other way. Otherwise, questions would arise: From which
sources the precise time is known, who fixed it, according to what
clock and the like. The inventiveness of Scaliger's constructions
and of his followers would be revealed in a moment.
By the 19th century, so much chronological material had been
accumulated that its volume became a strong argument in favor of
its authenticity. When you have a work with dozens and hundreds
of volumes, the attempt to check and recheck the data cited by the
venerable predecessors fades away. And you need to trust someone!
It is impossible to call into Question all and sundry. So, the 19th
century chronologists have seen their task only in minor adjustments
of the dates. In the 20th century, the Question was considered
basically already resolved.
Nonetheless, as the developments of the chronology and its
liberation from the pressure of the authorities progress, new
generations of scientists have begun to discover serious difficulties
in the agreement of much of the manuscri pt data with Scaliger's
verSIon.
One of the most serious attempts to reexamine chronology was
undertaken by Isaac Newton. His discoveries in astronomy,
mathematics, mechanics and physics are well known to everyone.
They were included in the treasure house of the world's science.
At the same time, his work in the area of a historical chronology is
almost forgotten, although during his lifetime stormy arguments
raged around it.
In modern man's view, Isaac Newton's interest in chronology
seems strange. But the whole point is that, in his own time, this
was one of the mathematical sciences. And the great scientist
himself was involved with it practically all his life. He created
two works in which he analyzed the chronicles of the ancient
kings and the historical events in Europe "before the conquest of
Persia by Alexander the Great".
Without going into detail, one can say that on the whole,
Isaac Newton's chronology is essentially shorter than the one
accepted today. He shifted the majority of events which are dated
earlier than Alexander the Great forewards, that is, closer to us in
43
time. Newton understood correctly the direction in which
chronology had to be adjusted, in the view of the modern critics of
the traditional chronology.
They note that historical materials fantastic in terms of volume
have been assembled in Newton's main historical-theological works.
This is the fruit of 40 years of labor, intensive searches and enormous
erudition. In essence, Newton examined all the principal literature
on ancient history and all of its primary sources, beginning with
ancient and Oriental mythology. He drew on textual and philological
criticism, astronomical calculations connected with solar ecli pses,
and studied vast amounts of literature.
The conclusions at which he arrived were for his time strikingly
bold. The Scaligerian chronology ascribes the start of the rule of the
first Egyptian pharaoh, Menes (Mena) approximately to 3000 B.C.
Newton himself maintained that this event dates as recently
as 946 B.C. The shift forwards, consequently, is approximately
2,000 years. Although today the Theseus era is considered to date
from the 15th century B.C., in Isaac Newton's opinion, these events
took place nearly 936 years B.C. The shift of the dates forward is
approximately 700 years. Although today the famous Trojan War
is dated to approximately 1225 B.C., Isaac Newton was convinced
that this event occurred in 904 B.C. Consequently, the shift of
dates forwards is approximately 330 years.
The princi pal conclusions of Newton's work are:
Part of the history of "ancient" Greece was brought forward
by him an average of 300 years closer to us. The history of "ancient"
Egypt, which covers, according to the Scaligerian version, severaJ
thousand years (approximately from 3000 B.C.), has been
compressed into a stretch of time that is only 330 years long: from
946 to 617 B.C. In which connection, some fundamental dates of
ancient Egyptian history have been moved forward by Newton
approximately by 1,800 years.
In our time, when scientists possess a much greater volume of
knowledge than Isaac Newton, his constructions are regarded as
erroneous. Nonetheless, he accomplished one thing above all - he
gave convincing empirical proof that the traditional framework
into which historic sources are placed is intrinsically contradictory.
This is a very important moment in any scientific concept: if from
one of its parts one can reach conclusions which contradict the
conclusions from another of its component parts, that means it is
44
incorrect. Consequently, the chronology which historical science
uses is unscientific. It, in princi pic, cannot be derived
unambiguously from the whole aggregate of historic sources.
Newton was afraid that the publication of his book would
create many problems for him. It was being rewritten repeatedly by
him up right up until his death in 1727. However, rumors about
his investigations had spread rather widely, and the Princess of
Wales expressed the wish to get acquainted with them. Isaac Newton
sent her the manuscri pt with the condition that this text not· fall
into the hands of outside persons. The same thing was repeated too
with the Abbe' Conti. However, having returned to Paris, the Abbe'
began to give the manuscri pt to interestL'({ scientists.
As a result, Monsieur Freret translated the manuscri pt into
French, adding to it his own historical view. This translation
soon fell into the hands of the Parisian royal book dealer G.Gavelier.
The book appeared in print.
Reactions were distinctly negative. The investigations were
called just "the wrong beliefs of an honored dilettante". Then the
book simply was withdrawn from scientific circulation. And Cesare
Lombroso in his well known work, "Genius and Insanity" summed
up the results of Isaac Newton's work thusly:
"Newton, having subdued all of mankind with his mind, as
his contemporaries fairly wrote about him, in old age also was subject
to real psychic disorders, although not as intense as preceding people
of genius. At that time he also wrote, apparently, 'The Chronology",
The Apocalypse" and "Letter to Bentley", vague compositions,
involved and completely unlike those that he had written in his
youth". (Cesare Lombroso, "Genius and Madness", 1995.)
In other words, Isaac Newton suffered from senility and was
incapable of understanding the simplest things which were well
known to his contemporary bistorians. At the same time, Cesare
Lombroso, as it were, accidentally "forgets" that the scientist began
the investigations long before old age.
Similar accusations were heard later too in the criticism of
other scientists who dared to be involved with the revision of the
chronology. The same method came into play: everything that
contradicted the Scaligerian chronology was attributed either to
ignorance or to feeblemindedness.
One cannot but mention the French Jesuit (and Newton's
contemporary) Jean Hardouin (1646-1729.) He was one of the best
45
educated people of his time, a professor of theology who amazed
audiences with his exceptional erudition and deep knowledge, both
as an author and as a commentator on numerous works in the study
of language and literature, theology, history, archaeology, numismatics,
chronology and the philosophy of history. These works today have
been so relegated to obscurity by historians that, unfortunately,
little enough of his real range of accomplishments is known even
within the Circle of specialists, let alone ordinary lovers of history.
Jean Hardouin maintained that practically all "ancient" works
were written by Catholic monks, starting from the 13th century.
He called them forgeries. He also wrote about the counterfeiting
of almost all "ancient" coins, "old" works of art, "old" inscri ptions
carved in stone and, what is especially important, all documents of
the ecumenical councils that supposedly preceded the Council of
Trent (1545-63).
Jean Hardouin thought that Jesus Christ and his apostles, if
they existed at all, should have been able to deliver his sermons in
Latin. He was certain that the Greek translations of the New and
Old Testaments were made much later than is thought by the
church. Among the others who were exposed as forgers of the
classics of Christianity he named St. Augustine, the validity of
whose works he did not acknowledge. Finally, he appealed for
Newton to stop speaking about "ancient" times that didn't exist
in any event. Jean Hardouin considered the burning of Troy to
have been the destruction of Jerusalem. (This is congruent, by the
way, with the point of view of contemporary critics relative to the
identity of ancient Troy, Jerusalem and Constantinople).
The majority of Jean Hardouin's works were forbidden by the
church in t 739-42 and included in the index of forbidden books.
Their outright suppression began at this point.
After Jean Hardouin's death, the majority of "ancient" sources
disclosed by him were gradually rehabilitated and are included
today in the stock of historical works taken seriously by science.
Once the question of forgeries has been broached, it will be
appropriate to note that these forgeries were not all composed in the
Middle Ages. One of the most fantastic discoveries of the 19th
century was the "accidental" discovery of the "Institutes of Gaius"
supposedly written in the 2nd century A.D. by Barthold Georg
Niebuhr. These were completely unknown in the Middle Ages and
unfortunately assumed the existence of a hopelessly large number of
46
contemporary 19th century technological devolopments. Here too
were 16th century arithmetical operations, the principles of modern
business accounting, and constant references to paper (which
appeared in Europe only in the 14th century) and to books which,
in the second century of our era, no one could even have imagined.
Niebuhr supposedly accidentally discovered the "Institutes of
Gaius" in the Verona library in 1816 while reading one of the
theological treatises. In which connection during "restoration" of
the text he finished writing up to 90 percent of the information.
Niebuhr even contrived a new method of restoration -
interpolation. The essence of the method is that being based on
individual documents and being guided by the so-called "spirit of
the era", one can as it were retrieve whole layers of ancient history
from nonexistence. And here he was guided by the "spirit", while
composing the "Institutes".
One can enumerate the facts discovered by critics endlessly.
Giambattista Vico (1668-1744), in the book "Principles of the
New Science Concerning the Common Nature of Nations" proved
that the Homeric poems were written by various authors and in
vanous eras.
Baruch Spinoza in tbe "Theological-Political Treatise" pointed
at the numerous absences, contradictions, breaks and repetitions
(duplicates, as we say today) in the text of the Old Testament.
In the middle of the 18th century, the Frenchman Astruc showed
the existence of two editions in the Book of Genesis - the Eloist
and the Jahvist.
Critical work on sources led Pierre Bayle to complete
skepticism. In "Historical and Critical Dictionary" he noted the
deepest contradictions between the sources and came to a conclusion
about the inability to find in them any kind of a rational core.
The "Academy of Inscriptions and Belles-Lettres" founded in
1701 in Paris became the center of critical work on ancient sources
in the 18th century. Violent discussion on the authenticity of
Roman history developed at it. Academy member Puy showed
the absolute legendary quality of Roman historic tradition and
thought that no reliable sources on Roman history existed.
Louis de Beaufort developed a skeptical attitude toward the
sources overall and to the Roman historical tradition in particular
in his own well-known historical work "Dissertation sur
j'incertitude des cinq premiers siecles de I'Histoire romaine". (Eugen
47
Gabowitsch "A Criticism of the Chronology and a Revision of
History in Western Europe"),
In tbe 19th century, one of the most important representatives
of the scientific school which had received the name of hypercriticism
was the German historian Theodor Mommsen. He was fully on the
side of the traditional chronology and did quite a bit to reinforce it
further. But the nonsense really struck him very sharply that was
contrived by chronologist colleagues, And Theodor Mommsen
caustically wrote: "Although King Tarquin II was of age as early as
the moment of his father's death and ascended the throne 39 years
after that, nonetheless, he assumed the throne as a youth ...
Pythagoras, who arrived in Italy almost a whole generation
before the exile of the kings (supposedly 509 B.C.), nonetheless
is regarded by Roman historians as a friend of the wise Numa
(who died supposedly near 673 B.C.)" Here the disparity of
dates reaches 100 years,
T. Mommsen continued:
"The state ambassadors, who were sent to Syracuse in 262 after
the founding of Rome, negotiate there with Oionysius the Elder,
who came to the throne 86 years after this," (Theodor Mommsen,
"History of Rome" - 1936.)
Between the various datings of such an important event as the
founding of Rome, historians have a discrepancy of at least 500
years. This affects appreciably the dating of a large number of
documents which record the calculation of the years "from the
founding of Rome (the city)". For example, Livy's well known
"History",
As is known to any school boy, Mesopotamia (the City between
Two Rivers) is considered one of the most ancient centers of
civilization. However, around the list of kings which was compiled
by the Sumerian priests, a more complex situation has been created
than with the Roman chronology.
"It was in its way the skeleton of a history, similar to our
chronological tables ... But there was little use from such a list...
The chronology of the list of kings", wrote the well known
archaeologist Leonard Woolley, "on the whole is clearly
meaningless .. , The succession of the dynasties was established
arbitrarily",
Leonard Woolley would have been able to add that the
randomness is in general a distinguishing feature of the generally
48
accepted chronology. Take that very same grand Alexander the
Great, a favorite around the world. Strange things occurred with
him, close to mystic. In the medieval chronicles he "speaks fair
words for France..." During the military leader's funeral monks
with crosses and incensories attended. Just when did he live and
die? And was he on this world in general?
If one is to judge by the compositions of the medieval authors,
the legends with many other heroes also are not all in order.
Catiline attends mass. Orpheus is the contemporary of Aeneas,
Sardanapal is the King of Greece, and Julian the Apostate is a
Papal chaplain.
Contemporary chronologists are not able to explain how such
a jumble of names arose and therefore, they have to adhere to the
opinion that "Everything in this world obtains a fantastic
coloration ... The coarsest anachronisms and the strangest
fabrications get along peacefully". In other words, medieval authors
everywhere were ignoramuses and visionaries whom it is impossible
to believe one iota. You see, if one believes them, then one must
admit that so-called antiquity as a matter of fact was the present
for the compilers of the medieval chronicles.
This threatens surprising consequences for traditional scientists,
and even for the whole structure of modern history. So it is far
safer and comfortable to explain the medieval chronologists as
semiliterate amateurs, who confused various eras in their compositions.
At the end of the 19th century, the Swiss scholar Robert Baldauf,
a private senior instructor of the University of Basel, applied the
method of comparative philological analysis in studying the books
of the Old Testament. What he discovered is set forth in two
"Histories and Criticisms". And Robert Baldauf discovered obvious
parallels of the Old Testament with the knightly romances of the
Middle Ages and at the very same time with the "Iliad" of Homer!
Robert Baldauf simply had to consider both the Bible and "Iliad"
as written in the lattcr Middle Agcs.
Julius Caesar's "Gallic Wars," as also his "Civil Wars", according
to Robert Baldauf, is a latc forgery.
Summing up his research, Robert Baldauf wrote: "Our Romans
and Greeks were Italian humanists".
"All of them - Homer, Sophocles, Aristotle and many other
"ancient" writers, who werc thrown about by historians over many
centuries", according to Robert Baldauf, were the children of one
49
century, but their home was not ancient Rome and not ancient
Hellas, but Italy of the 14th and 15th centuries.
As Eugen Gabowitsch writes, Wilhelm Kammeyer delivered
the strongest blow to the traditional chronology. He was a lawyer
and worked as a notary in Hanover. The work gave him a fine
basis for critical research of the documents of the past. In 1926, he
completed a book, which then was published under the title, "The
Universal Forgery of History".
Wilhelm Kammeyer analyzed donated legal documents which
had accumulated over the centuries in the archives. They were
extremely important for people, inasmuch as they certified the
ownership of property, benefits, appointments and the like.
According to the logic of things, each document was supposed to
contain information about who, what, when and to whom given
and where the granted deed was compiled.
Thus, Wilhelm Kammeyer discovered the following. The deeds
often were compiled without a date or with a dale obviously inserted
later, with an incomplete date (a year or day is absent) or a date is
written in a manner alien to the text. Not infrequently the deeds
dated as the same day were "subscribed" at various points on the map.
If one is to judge by them, the rulers continuously traveled
from place to place in order to endow ever newer and newer
subjects. In which connection, all the German emperors did this,
regardless of age and health. The emperor Conrad somehow visited
for half a century about every 2-3 years various towns on the very
same Christian holidays. Often at one and the same time.
The forgers destroyed a countless quantity of really original
documents, replacing them with forgeries. Often they scraped off
the old text and wrote the new on the old parchment which thus, in
the opinion of the forgers of the later Middle Ages and the beginning
of the new time, were confirmation of the "antiquity" of the deed.
Sometimes the ancient document was exposed only to a small change,
which was called upon to distort its original meaning.
It is no secret why all this was done. The new feudal masters,
who had taken possession from the former rulers, needed
documentary justification of their pillage. The forged documents
were supposed to be evidence of the antiquity of the right to
possession and to date to one of the great ancient Christian
sovereigns, and they just invented them for this purpose. The
documents of the heathen "German" history were destroyed and
SO
replaced by forged documents of a Gallic-Roman history.
The existence of the Catholic popes until the so-called Avignon
Captivity was fully contrived. The history before 1300 is
irrecoverable, since all the early documents were destroyed and
replaced by forgeries. The wars between the national churches in
the prepapal period subsequently were presented as a war with
heretics and apostates.
It is important to note that the main mass of 19th century
historians used the "classical" antiquities for the assertion of their
views. For example, the English historian Mitford in the work
"History of Greece" corroborated the ideas of the English Tories
with the legendary Greek past.
In France, the history of "antiquity" was examined as the
embodiment of the ideas of Republican freedom, of civil self-rule,
patriotism, etc. That is, historiography became a branch of public
opinion creation and politics. This was incapable of rising to the
level of discussion about any kind of serious scientific work.
Louis Phillipe Seguer's 33-volume "History of the Ancient
World", published in 1824-1830, was in fact a multivolume art-
publistic production.
The start of the 20th century was marked by "modernism" -
historians dressed up heroes of the ancient world in the tails and
top hats of financiers, clothed the proletariat in workers' smocks,
imparted to temples the look of exchanges and banks, renamed
works as factories, and seriously examined feudal and capitalistic
relations in ancient society.
Simultaneously, a well-founded critique of the chronology was
developed scientifically. The works of the Russian naturalist,
Nikolay MoroZQv, are especially interesting. He established that,
judging by astronomical retro-calculations, the start of Christianity
has to be transferred at least three centuries closer to our days. He
substantiated this conclusion in his book published in 1907 and
subsequently printed eight more books on the subject of how
astronomy and other natural sciences together with historical
criticism refute the popular concepts of historians.
The works of the American historian, Immanuel Velikovsky
(1895-1979) occupy a special place in the critical analysis of history.
Being a doctor of medicine, he studied psychoanalysis and worked
on the book The Dreams Freud Dreamed, where the main attention
was devoted to Moses, Akhnaton and Dedi pus. During the research,
51
this scientist paid attention to one of the key monuments of the
Egyptian written language - the papyrus The Admonitions of Ipuwer,
an Egyptian Sage.
The Egyptian papyrus, which its translator Alan Gardiner dated
as the end of the Middle Kingdom, describes a series of events
which practically are identical to the "Egyptian plagues" mentioned
in the Book of Exodus. Inclu(k>d in these disasters are the torrents
of blood, the hail of stones and fire; the pollution of the Nile, in
which the water became stinking and unsuited for drinking; the
plague of the cattle and the loss of the crops; the onset of a long
period of darkness which was accompanied by thunder and fierce
winds; the flight of the slaves who had seized the valuables of the
rich Egyptians; and the culmination of the catastrophe - a destructive
earthquake. These and other striking coincidences between the
Biblical and Egyptian texts compelled Vclikovsky to promote the
hypothesis that the tale in Exodus was not fiction or a legend, but
represented an account of the catastrophe that occurred, an image
similar to that described by the Egyptians and the Israelites.
We will not assess Velikovsky's assertions about the cal:.:.strophe,
which became the start of a whole scientific trend, which is called
catastrophism. We shall note only that these works also compel a
fundamentally rei-examination of chronology. (Immanuel Vclikovsky.
Worlds in Collision, 1950, Ages in Chaos, vol. 1-3, 1952-1978, Earth
in Upheaval, 1955 and Dedi pus and Akhnaton, 1960).
The research of critics, as we sec, reveals in the traditional
history irreconcilable contradictions between facts, a multitude of
falsifications and forgeries, and the biased assessment of events
which arc claimed to have actually taken place. The conclusions
may appear amazing: the past, starting from "antiquity" and ending
in the Middle Ages, is in fact unknown. Our collective "past" was
invented in the era of the so-called Renaissance. Yes, it was written
on parchment, etched in stone, cast in metal and so firmly entered
our consciousness that no criticism is in a condition to compel
mankind to be doubtful of the accuracy of the traditional history.
But this doesn't make it authentic.

S2
TH VERIFICATION OF HISTORY
f
WI IrALGEBRA CHAPTER THREE

A new era in the critical comprehension of traditional

chronology started comparatively recently. It is predicated on the
works of the world-renowned Russian mathematician and scientist,
Anatoly T. Fomenko, who has returned the study of chronology to
the realm of the mathematical sciences. Together with teammates
and followers, both in Russia and in the U.S., Canada and Germany,
he has revealed the pattern of the drift of real history into the past
and its interleaving into contrived epochs, kingdoms and empires.
The "new chronologists" also have defined the route of the "overhaul"
of the chronological system.
The works of Fomenko and his followers allow us probably
our only opportunity to determine when the empire of the Israeli
monotheists really was, and what it really was. Therefore, we
shall dwell on it in more detail.
Anatoly Fomenko started with an examination of the ancient
star catalogs. After all, many events which supposedly occurred in
antiquity are dated based on them. A new method of dating the
catalogs was developed. Then this method was used for dating
Ptolemy's well known catalog from his book "Almagest". At this
point, it became clear that" Almagest", most likely, was compiled in
the time frame 600-1300 A.D., and not in the second century A.D., as
the traditional history supJXlSCS.
Ptolemy is generally regarded as not only the greatest, but
also the last astronomer of antiquity. After him a "darkness" of
something like more than five hundred years is believed to have
appeared in astronomy. Competence at observation fell to such an
extent that, in the eight and a half centuries which separate Ptolemy
from Albatenius, there were almost no observations which have any
scientific value. This, in any event, is what the scientist Arthur
Berry's summation of the situation in "A Short History of
Astronomy" .

53
 Then interest in astronomy arose again with the Arabs as
early as the 8th-9th centuries A.D. They translated "Almagest,"
built observatories and made a multitude of observations. The
earliest of the well-known "Almagest" manuscri pts are dated
approximately to the 9th century A.D. (the Arab translation).
These are the positions of the traditional history.
Not all agree with the lofty assessment of "Almagest". In
American astronomer, Richard Newton's recent book "The Crime
of Claudius Ptolemy", Ptolemy is proclaimed "the most successful
fraud in the history of science". Richard Newton made such a
conclusion based on the analysis of numerical material which is
contained in "Almagest". The conclusion is brave and decisive,
and one could be in agreement with it in many ways if Richard
Newton at the same time had additionally cast doubt upon the
Sea ligerian date of the composition of "Almagest". But the author
didn't go that far.
New chronologists have chosen a second route. The essence of
their work on "Almagest" amounts to the following. It is well
known that some stars are shifting around the firmament. Among
them are also well known, bright stars such as Arcturus. Since
4

these are shifting, over time they change their coordinates. These
changes provide the basis of an empirically verifiable dating method.
We shall take a contemporary star catalog that fixes the
positions of the stars seen in our era. We then shall examine any
year in the past and find, with the aid of a computer, the precise
values of the coordinates of the moving stars for this year. Such a
calculation is made with great precision. Modern astrometry and
the well-known values of the stars' movements themselves are used.
Then we will compare the data received with the coordinates
recorded in the catalog. Those years in which there are the best
agreements between the coordinates indicated are the most likely
dates of the compilation of the catalog.
And so, the essence of the work lies in the comparison of the
true coordinates and the coordinates of the stars from the "Almagest"
catalog. The main difficulties lie here. What sort are they?
The coordinates of the stars from "Almagest" will contain errors,
and often they are extremely significant. The value of the catalog's
division is 10 minutes of are, but its real precision is lower. In order
to get an idea whether this is great or small, let us say that some stars
S4
cover such a distance in 350-400 years. Thus, it is difficult to hope to
get the date of the catalog's compilation with a precision up to tOO or
even 200 years.
In their research, the scientists took the catalog in the form in
which it was cited in the fundamental work of Peters and Knobel.
And as a result of the calculations, they found that the interval of
possible dating of the Almagest star catalog, as we have already
said, is from 600 to 1300 years A.D.
It was shown that absolute latitudinal discrepancies of the
"Almagest's" named stars cannot be more than to minutes outside
of this interval (from the stated "well measured area of the sky").
Before 200 A.D., the maximum latitudinal discrepancy of the
well-measured stars cannot be less than 35 minutes of arc, which
makes the hypothesis of the compilation of the catalog in an era
earlier than 200 A.D. inconceivable.
The dating method was tested on several reliably-dated
medieval catalogs (Ulugbek, Tiho Brage and others), and also on a
number of artificially compiled star catalogs. The effectiveness of
the method is supported fully: the data received with its help
practically coincided with the reliably known dates of the
compilation of the indicated catalogs.
"Almagest" bas some strange features.
The first star of the catalog is Polaris. But the position of Polaris
in it is incongruous with the astronomical situation in the second
century A.D. After all, there was a second star at the Pole then.
Everything coincides well in that case if the observations occurred in
the 10-16th centuries A. D. Included in the catalog is the star Achernar,
admittedly not visible in Alexandria, where, according to traditional
history, "Almagest" was compiled in the second century A.D. But
in t.he 15-16th centuries, Achernar aJready was visible.
Duerer's drawings of the constellations (star maps) are used
in "Almagest", but they were engraved only in 1515.
Each of these facts can be explained independently, but, taken
together, they point to the fact that, most likely, "Almagest" is a
book that was written in the lO-16th centuries A.D. ("Chronology
-3. Astronomical Methods in Chronology", Ptolemy's" Almagest",
Tiho Brage "Copernicus").
Another investigation is connected with the new star which
flared up in the east, according to the Gospel and church tradition,
55
in the year of Christ's birth. Then, after 31 years, in the year of the
Resurrection, a full solar ecli pse took place. Church sources speak
clearly in particular about the solar ecli pse in connection with
Christ's resurrection.
We shall note that a solar eclipse in Palestine, and what is
more,a full solar ecli pse,is an exceptionally rare event. Solar ecli pses
happen every year, but these are generally visible only in the narrow
stri p of the lunar shadow's trajectory on the Earth - this in
comparison with lunar ecli pses, which are visible all at once from
half the territory of the globe.
Biblical knowledge of the 18-19th centuries did not reveal,
naturally, the Gospel solar eclipse in the Palestine of the start of
our era. Then the solar eclipse was recast into a lunar. All the
same, true, it did not help because they also didn't find a lunar
eclipse which approached it precisely. Therefore, they simply
ceased talking about the problem.
What then was discovered? It turns out, such a pair of the
rarest astronomical events - the flare up of a new star and 31
years later a full solar ecli pse in the Mediterranean -really did
take place, but only in the 1tth century A.D! This is the well-
known flare up of a new star in 1054 and the full solar ecli pse of 16
February 1086. The shadow of the solar eclipse passed through
Italy and Byzantium.
Jt is both interesting and significant that references to Christ
in the medieval chronicles of the II th century have come down to
us unaltered. For example, in the Chronograph of 1680 it is
reported that Christ himself visited Pope Leo IX (1049-1054):
"It is related how Christ, in the form of a beggar, visited him (Leo
IX) in his bedroom". As Anatoly Fomenko discovered, there are
parallels with the Gospel in the biography of Pope Gregory VII,
who died in 1085.
Anatoly Fomenko also showed that in many chronicles, the
year 1054 A.D. (the so-called "fundamental shift of 1,053 years in
the chronology") is implied as year 1 in accordance with "Christ's
Birth". This means that the medieval chroniclers often dated the
birth of Christ precisely to 1054 (or 1053).
InCidentally, the start of the first Crusade -"for the liberation
of the J-Ioly Sepulchre" is dated 1096. On the other hand, medieval
church sources ("The Story of the Savior's Passion", "Pilate's Letter
56
to Tiberius"), which describe the events connected with Christ in
greater detail than do the Gospels, maintain that immediately after
Christ's resurrection, Pilate was called to Rome and there put to
death, and that Caesar's army was sent to Jerusalem where it
captured him.
Today such assertions arc considered medieval conjectures,
inasmuch as nothing is mentioned in Scaliger's chronology about
any Roman campaign to Jerusalem in the 30s of the first century
A.D. However, if Christ's resurrection is dated at the end of the
11 th century, this assertion by the medieval sources takes on solid,
literal sense: I.e., Christ's resurrection happened in conjunction
with the first Crusade, during which Jerusalem was taken.
The picture that emerges from this, as discovered by the scientist
and his followers, is that practically all of the story which is
attributed to dates earlier than 900 A.D. consists of duplicates, the
"originals" of which are found in the time frame of 900-1600 A.D.
In particular, each event described in a contemporary text book as
having happened earlier than 900 A.D. is a concatenation of several
later events. In other words, it is a stratified chronicle, gllled
together from pieces relatively connected to each other, practically
identical among themselves.
Anatoly Fomenko performed a simple (at first glance)
investigation. If one takes the biography of any person and writes
down the dates of the primary events of his life, taking the date of
birth as 0, then a definite series of dates will result. Let us assume:
o - birth,
12 - serious illness,
22 - marriage,
27 - a war ,
29 - birth of a son - an heir,
and so on.
The resulting series has an interesting property - a specificity.
Provided that one has a rather large number of dates, the probability
of the concurrence of any t\vo individual biographies is practically
nil. What, theil, was the result when they entered the dynastic
data of many royal families both of Europe and Asia into the
computer? The results were stunning. The biographies coincided
when it was a question of rulers who lived earlier than the 17th
century. After the 17th century, there was no coincidence.
57
 Fomenko and his colleagues again and again checked the
method and the conclusions, but there were no errors. For example,
the biographies of all the Chinese emperors earl ier than the 17th
century duplicate with inconceivable precision the biographies of
medieval European rulers.
Besides the duplication of the very same heroes under various
names, gigantic shifts in time of the events described have been
detected. Among the most significant examples are the numerous
coincidences of the numerical characteristics of the biographies of
the Egyptian pharaohs and the emperors of the Holy Roman
Empire. They analyzed on the computer the writings of the Roman
historian Josephus Flavius, one of the classic sources, the works of
whom describe solid periods of history both of Israel and of ancient
Rome. With what result? The implacable computer showed that
it is simply a retelling of the Old Testament with a mani pulation
of names and geographical events. In other words, the Old
Testament was borrowed from Flavius. The only difference is that
the Old Testament is talking about the Judaic kings, and Flavius
is writing about the Roman emperors. This doesn't cbange the
facts of the matter. The biographies coincide.
The cardinal conclusions made by Fomenko and his colleagues
have been met with furious criticism. Traditional historians reject
them both as a whole and in part. However, there still are yet to
appear arguments in any critical article capable of refuting the
mathematical and astronomical part of the works of the "new
chronologies". It is useless to argue with mathematics. This
being the case, the rejections reduce to "It cannot be that so many
learned men of the past were so mistaken", "We must not deprive
mankind of his history", and "There are methods (somewhere)
which refute Fomenko".
It is worth dwelling especially on the final argument. The
question of methods developed both comparatively long ago and
altogether recently, both times receiving widespread publicity.
This has been the case, in particular, with respect to the
archaeological dating of sources and monuments.
For example, in Egypt of the t8-19th dynasties, Greek vessels
of the Mycena.ean culture are discovered in graves. For this
reason, these are considered by archaeologists to have been
contemporary with each other. It is not possible to regard them
58
in any other way.
Later, they find these same (or closely similar) vessels along
with a special type of fasteners used in Mycenae in Germany,
alongside urns. A similar urn was found near Fanger, and in this
urn is also found the new type of pin. A si~i1ar pin is found in
Sweden, in the "Barrow of King Bjorn". As a result, this burial
mound was dated to the time of the 18~19th Egyptian dynasty.
But at the same time it was discovered that Bjorn's burial mound
could in no way be correlated with the king of the Vikings Bjorn;
it had to have been constructed a good 2,000 years earlier.
It is not clear here what to understand from such similarity
of discoveries. Some may say that the objects are similar, but
others will deny this. And he who is closer to the truth will not
win the argument, but he who has the weightier authority in the
scientific world. That is, the procedure will rest on undivided
subjectivism and successful appeal to previously established
authorities. Can one honestly call thjs scientific? In our opinion,
no. Especially since again the objects found are being compared
with similar discoveries dated earlier in order to accord with
the Scaligcrian tradition.
The excavations of Pompeii are a striking example of the
problems which arise in the dating of archaeological material. The
15th century author lacopo Sannazaro wrote: "We were approaching
the city (Pompeii) and its towers, homes, theatres and temples,
untouched by the centuries, already were visible".
ThiS is in the 15th century! But Pompeii is considered
destroyed and covered by the eruption of 79 A.D. It is too much
to explain anything; archaeologists are forced to assess Sannazaro's
words thus: "In the 15th century some of Pompeii's buildings
already stood out higher than the alluvium". In "some" they
include, as we see, both towers, and homes, and theatres, and
temples. In a word, the whole city.
A fantastic picture is being formed. The thing is that there
was never one case when ancient settlements, buried beneath the
earth, would have appeared over time on the surface, and then once
more have gone beneath the alluvium. Such cannot be. But they
reason so about Pompeii, the remains of which were stumbled across
only in 1748, in particular. Otherwise it would be necessary to
change all dating.
59
 Excavations in Pompeii itself were performed barbarously.
Archaeologists write: "Now it is difficult to determine the magnitude
of the harm which resulted from the vandalism of that time ... If a
picture didn't seem beautiful to someone, they broke it into pieces
and threw it away as rubbish ... When they discovered some kind
of a marble table with a bronze inscri ption, they tore off individual
letters and threw them into a basket... They fabricated souvenirs
for tourists from fragments of sculptures, not infrequently with
pictures of saints".
It is not ruled out that some of these supposed "forgeries"
may have been originals. But only those were allowed to survive
intact which would fit into the Scaligerian chronology.
In the 20th century, archaeologists and historians drew attention
to a strange process: the overwhelming majority of ancient monuments
in the last 200~300 years, that is, starting from the moment when
they began to keep an eye on them, somehow are being destroyed
more fiercely and faster than in the previous centuries and even
millennia. Here is a typical article published in a Russian newspaper
in October 1981:
"SPHINX LN DANGER. The sculpture of the well-known
sphinx has been standing firm for almost 5,000 years in Giza
(Egypt.) However, now the pollution of the surroundings has told
upon its preservation. The sphinx has found itself in a dangerous
situation. A large piece (a claw) has broken off of the sculpture.
Increased humidity, salinization of the soil and, chiefly, the
accumulation of sewage at the location where the sphinx is located,
which is not subject to any kind of cleaning, has served as the
reason for this". ("Izvestiya").
Usually they make reference to "modern industry", but,
unfortunately, no one has performed a broad investigation to evaluate
the influence of "modern civilization" on stone structures. It is
fully possible that the structures are not as ancient as the Scaligerian
Chronology contends, and they are being destroyed naturally and
at a natural rate.
One of the modern methods which pretends to independent
dating of historical monuments is the dendrochronological.
Its idea is rather simple. It is based on the fact that tree
rings in the trunks of trees form unevenly through the years. It is
thought that a plot of the thickness of the annual rings is
60
approximately identical in trees of one species which grow in the
same places and conditions.
In order for one to use such a method for dating, one needs at
first to build a reference plot of the thickness of the annual rings
of the given species of trees over a sufficiently lengthy historical
period. We shall call such a plot a dendrochronological scale. If
such a scale were built, then with its aide one can date several
archaeological discoveries which contain pieces of lumber. One
needs to determine the species of the tree, drill out a narrow,
longitudinal tube of it, measure the thickness of the rings, compare
it with the sequence of ring sizes and find on the reference scale a
section showing the same timetable. At the same time, the question
is supposed to be researched - which deviations of tbe comparative
plots may one ignore. Anything was likely to happen in the past:
there were very cold years, there was little rain, or the other way
round, it rained without let up. Therefore, the rings also turned.
out at various thicknesses. And in general it is difficult to study
the wood of hardwoods. Its indistinct rings tell us very little
about the past. Good quality archaeological material, contrary to
expectations, has been found to be insufficient.
And another thing: the dendrochronological scales in Europe
are drawn downwards only by several centuries. You see, ancient
trees in European forests number only 300-400 years of age. Thus
it is not possible to date ancient structures.
The American dendrochronology is in the best condition (the
Douglas fir, the mountain and yellow pine), but this region is far
from Europe.
In 1994, a special conference on this problem was held. At it,
American professor Peter Ian Kunjhold reported about the modern
condition of dendrochronology and argued that not one of the
methods can give a clear and uninterrupted picture of datings
from our time further back than the 10th century A.D.That is, they
are suitable only for a thousand years. [n which connection even
in this case they are doubtful, inasmuch as they are tied to the time
axis only on the basis of the Colerain chronology.
Nonetheless, some individual beams were dated with this
technique. For example, one of the beams from a pharaoh's tomb.
At the same time, they were dependent upon the traditional
chronology and attributed it to the era this required. Finding
other beams later, the chronologists correlated. these to this beam
61
that already had been "dated". Sometimes this turned out well.
As a result, a segment of the dendrochronological scale emerged
around the original dating. The relative dating of various
discoveries within this segment, it is possible, is correct. However,
their absolute dating, that is, tying all the segment to the time axis,
is mistaken because the first dating made according to the Sc'lligerian
chronology is uncertain.
Scaliger's historical chronology has naturally been extended
into other scales used to determine the age of various other objects.
There were numerous attempts to determine absolute age
according to the rate of sediment accumulation. They turned out
to be unsuccessful. Studies were held simultaneously in many
countries, but the results, contrary to expectations, turned out to be
distressing. It became obvious that even identical species in similar
natural conditions can flourish and vanish again with the most
inexplicable speed, making it almost impossible to establish any
kind of precise measurement using these processes. For example,
from ancient written sources it is believed that the Egyptian
Pharaoh Ramses I1 reigned nearly 3,000 years ago. The buildings
which were erected during his time are now buried under a three-
meter thickness of sand. This drifting works out to approximately
a one-meter layer of sand accumulating in a millennium. At the
same time, only 3 centimeters of sediment were deposited in some
areas of Europe in a thousand years. But at the same time, in the
mouths of the estuaries in the south of Ukraine the same quantity
of sediment is deposited annually.
They also tried to develop other methods. The radium/
uranium and radium/radioactive methods work within the limits
of 300,000 years. They are convenient for dating of geological
formations in those cases when the required precision does not
exceed 4-10,000 years. For purposes of historic chronology, these
methods, for the time being, are unfortunately unable to give any
practical bell'.
The most widely used is the radiocarbon method, which alleges
the capacity to date ancient organic materials within a small margin
of error. However, very serious difficulties in tbe use of this method
have come to light whkh require a re-evaluation of it. The radiation
that penetrates the atmosphere varies for many reasons. Hence, the
quantity of the radioactive isotope of carbon (C-14) that is formed
62
must fluctuate over time. It is necessary, at a minimum, to find a
method which would take this into account. Moreover, a huge
quantity of carbon which is created owing to the combustion of
wood, coal, oil, peat, shale oils and the products of their processing is
expelled continuously into the atmosphere. What kind of influence
docs this source of atmospheric carbon have on the increase of the
radioactive isotope's content? No one knows.
In order to determine a true age, one has to estimate complex
adjustments which reflect the change of the atmosphere's
composition over the last millennium. These ambigUities along
with some difficulties of a technical nature have caused doubts
about the precision of many findings that were carried out by the
carbon method.
The originator of the method is Willard F. Libby. He was
absolutely convinced of the accuracy of the Scaligerian datings
and absolutely relied upon these in his work. However, the
archaeologist Vladimir Miloichich has convincingly shown that
this method yields chaotic errors of up to 1,000·2,000 years, and
in its own "independent" dating of ancient specimens it slavishly
follows the dating proposed by historians, and therefore it is
impossible to say that it "confirms" it.
Willard F. Libby wrote: "We had no disagreement with
historians relative to ancient Rome and ancient Egypt. We have not
carried out numerous evaluations for this epoch, since its chronology
is known to archaeology better than we were able to establish it and,
placing at our disJXlsal specimens (which, by the way, are burnt in the
process of radiocarbon measurement); the archaeologists rather have
rendered us a service".
This acknowledgement of Libby is significant, inasmuch as the
difficulties of the Scaligerian chronology were most particularly
noticed in those very regions and epochs for which "numerous
evaluations were not carried out". With those, every control
measurement which nonetheless was carried out, the situation is
thus: with radiocarbon dating, for example, of the James Henry
Breasted collection (Egypt), "suddenly it was discovered," Willard
Libby report.., "that the third object which we had subjected to
analysis was found to be modern!".
This was a severe blow. Nevertheless, a way out was found
then and there: they declared the object a forgery, inasmuch as no
63
one doubted the correctness of the Scaligerian chronology of ancient
Egypt.
There are no broad controlling statistics. Instead there are dictates
by historians, who supposedly know best what happened and when.
Nevertheless, even the historians aren'l always convinced of their
computations.
Willard F. Libby again wrote: " ... we have not becomc aware
of a deficiency in the materials of the epoch, which is 3,700 years
away from us, for which one would be able to check the precision
and reliability of the method ... The historians who are acquainted
with me are ready to vouch for the precision within the bounds of
the last 3,750 years, however, when it is a question of more ancient
events, their confidence vanishes".
In other words, the radiocarbon method was used Widely thcre
wherc the results received are difficult to check by other
indepcndent methods.
Some archaeologists, while not doubting the scientific
prind pies of the radiocarbon method, have proposed that in the
method itself is hidden the possibility of signHicant errors, which
are caused by as yet unknown effects. But, perhaps, these errors are
small anyhow and do not prcvcnt, for instance, a coarse dating (in
an interval of 2-3,000 years "downward" from our time)? However,
it turns out that the situation is more serious. The errors are too
great and chaotic. They can reach a magnitude of 1-2,000 years
with the dating of objects of our time and the Middle Ages.
In 1984, a discussion developed at two symposia in Edinburgh
and Stockholm around the radiocarbon method. In Edinburgh
examples of hundreds of analyses were cited in which errors of datings
ranged in a region from 600 to 1,800 years. In Stockholm the scientists
complained that the radiocarbon method for some reason distorts the
history of ancient Egypt in the epoch which is believed to be 4,000
years away from us. There also are other cases, for example in the
history of the Balkan civilizations... Specialists have declared
unanimously that the radiocarbon method has been doubted up to
now because it is incapable of independent calibration. Without this,
it is unacceptable, since there is no independent indication that it
yields accurate dates on the calendar scale.
Radiocarbon dates have introduced, as L.S.Klein writes,
"confusion in a number of archaeologists. Some, with characteristic
64
admiration, accepted the instructions of the physicists. These
archaeologists hurried to rebuild the chronological layouts.
Vladimir Miloichich is the first archaeologist to come out against
the radiocarbon method who has not only assailed the practical
use of radiocarbon dating but also savagely criticized the theoretical
suppositions of the physical method itself. While comparing
individual measurements of modern specimens with an average
figure - a standard - Miloichich substantiates his skepticism with
a series of glaring paradoxes".
These paradoxes are actually glaring. The shell of a living
American mollusk dates to nearly 1,200 years old! A blooming
wild rose from North Africa (radioactivity of 14.7) has nevertheless
been "dead" for 360 years, according to the physicists. An Australian
eucalyptus, whose radioactiVity is 16.31, "doesn't exist" yet for them
- it will exist only 600 years from now. A shell from Florida, in
which was fixed a 17.4 decay per minute per gram of carbon "will
emerge" only in 1,080 years ... This data was published in the
magazine "Science" in 1959.
They have used the radiocarbon method also for the evaluation
of archaeological discoveries and ancient objects. The results were
shown to be just as incredible. Radiocarbon dating in Heidelberg
of a specimen from a mediaeval altar. .. has shown that the wood
used for repair of the altar still hasn't grown at all!. .. In the Velt
cave (Iran) the lower-lying layers are dated 6,054 (plus/minus 415)
and 6,595 (plus/minus 500) years fl.C. and the upper-lying are
8,610 (plus/minus 610) years B.C. Thus, the upper layer has been
found to be older than the lower by 2,556 years. And there are more
similar examples than can be counted.
In the magazine "Nature" (March 1970) it is reported that a
content investigation of carbon-14 was done for organic material
from the mortar of an English castle. It is well known that the
castle was built 738 years ago. However, the radiocarbon "dating"
gave the "age" as supposedly 7,370 years. An error of 6,500 years!
They have dated freshly kil1ed seals by carbon-14 content.
By carbon dating, their "age" is determined to be 1,300 years!
And the mummified bodies of seals, which died only 30
years ago, were "dated" as having an age of 4,600 years. These
results were presented in the "Antarctic Journal of the United
States" (1971).
65
 L. S. Klein continues: "Miloichich appeals for abandoning,
at last, the 'critical' editing of the results of radiocarbon
measurements by physicists and their 'customers' - the archaeologists,
and to abolish the "critical" censorship in the publication of
results. Miloichich asks the physicists not to screen out dates
which for some reason seem to be unbelievable to archaeologists
and to publish all results and all measurements without screening.
"Miloichich urges archaeologists' to be done with the tradition
of the prior familiarization of physicists with the approximate age
of a discovery (before its radiocarbon determination) aJld not give
them any reports about a discovery until they publish their figures!
It is impossible to establish otherwise just how many radiocarbon
dates coincide with those that are reliably historical, that is, it is
impossible to determine the degree of the method's reliability.
Moreover, with such editing of the results of the datings themselves
- on the appearance of the chronological layout received - affects
the subjective views of the researchers" (L.Klein "Archaeologists
Betting on Physics". "Nature". 1966. .Ni..> 2).
In 1988, a report of the radiocarbon dating of a well-known
Christian relic - the Shroud of Turin - received a great response.
According to the traditional version, this piece of cloth holds traces
of the body of the crucified Christ (First Century A.D.), that is
the age of the cloth is nearly 2,000 years. However, radiocarbon
dating gave a completely other date: approximately the 11-13th
centuries A.D. What's going on? Naturally, the conclusions suggest
themselves: the Shroud of Turin is a forgery, or the errors of
carbon dating can amount to many hundreds or even thousands of
years, or the Shroud of Turin is original, but correctly dated to the
11·13th centuries A.D. But then a second question arises already
- in which century did Christ live?
There are also other physical methods of dating. Unfortunately,
the sphere of their usage is appreciably narrower than the radiocarbon
method, but their precision is equally unsatisfactory for history's
needs. As early as the start of the last century, for example, it was
proposed to measure the age of buildings by their shrinkage or
deformation of the columns. This idea did not become a reality,
inasmuch as it is absolutely unclear - how is this method to be
calibrated, how is the speed of the shrinkage and the deformation
to be measured, and so on.
66
 For the dating of ceramics two methods were proposed:
archaeomagnetic and thermoluminescent. However, these have their
own calibration difficulties, and for many reasons archaeological
datings by these methods, say, in Eastern Europe, also are restricted
to the Middle Ages.
The conclusions of the new chronologists are thus: the
overwhelming mass of historical testimonies which have reached
our time describes events that happened after 1200 A.D. Very
little has been preserved well from the to-12th centuries. This
segment of written history has been forged to a significant degree.
The history of Eurasia up to the 16th century, as it were, has
been cobbled together from several, reiterated, original medieval
chronicles which have been shifted in both time and space relative
to each other. Adherents of the new chronology have been able
with a high degree of reliability to single out three time shifts in
the past of the original European chronicles. The "ancient Greek"
(it really is "ancient European") shift amounts to approximately
1,800 years. That is, events of the 14th century are attributed to
more than 1,000 years ago in the traditional historiography. The
all· European, "Christian" or "Roman" shift displaced 1,050 years,
that is, the birth of Christ was much closer to 1,000 years ago than
to 2,000. And, finally, the "Byzantine" shift of 300 years: the
imaginary transfer of the capital of the Roman Empire to
Constantinople is one example of this.
The main result of the work of Anatoly Fomenko and his
colleagues is the creation of a global chronological chart. An
original conception of the reconstruction of worldwide history
has been developed based on it. In recent times, it has found
support and confirmation in the works of the Bulgarian professor
Jordan Tabov, German professors Heribert Illig and Gunnar
Heinsohn, French historian Robert Caratini and others.
At the same time, the French lingUist Emile Benveniste
developed the strictly scientific "word-idea-thing" method, which
allowed him to argue the uniformity of the process of the
development of linguistic and social culture on all the Eurasian
geographic space in a time interval of approximately 2,500 years.
Settling on these and other works, adherents of the new
Chronology, Igor Davidenko and Yaroslav Kesler, came to the
conclusion that modern civilization· from the primitive in the 9th
67
century to the blooming in the 15th century - developed
consecutively as a single whole. From tbe 16th century, when
thanks to the growth of manufacturing a significant surplus of
product appeared and market relationships began to form, the
man-caused schism of mankind, which continues even through
today, was begun with the formation of "nations" and "national"
states. (Igor Davidenko, Yaroslav Kesler. "The Book of
Civilization". 2001).
The pre-Christian period, moved by the traditional chronology
deep into the centuries, in fact is separated from us by some 800-900
years. This was not that long ago, and indeed, from it all our
achievements of today derive - this era was the foundation of our
material and cultural existence. The time called by the adherents of
the traditional chronology the "dark ages", the centuries of barbarism,
that is the outbursts of savagery and wildness, after a supposedly
golden age of a concocted antiquity, is in fact a time of a slow,
advancing movement forward, of an accumulation of knowledge, of
cxperiencc, and of mankind's painful but fruitful spiritual quests.

68
LEGENDS
OF "A1~CIENT" GREECE CHAPTER FOUR

As we have said in the preface, the creation in the Middle Ages

of the chronology used today in historiography did not result from
some whim on the part of the lovers of antiquity who had emerged.
This is a point of primary importance which must be clearly
understood. Otherwise, it will be difficult to understand what
happened to the history, for example. of Europe in the accounts of
it produced by Scaliger and his followers.
In the European countries, the aspiration of those in power to
demonstrate to the whole world the antiquity of their face and, on
this basis, to confirm the legilimacy of their leadershi p both within
the state in the international arena became the princi pal motivation
underlying the appearance of the traditional chronology. This being
the case, the literate and in many instances talented people who
exercised the most important political roles immediately applied
themselves to this task in all monarchal courts.
It is clear that this was not done unselfishly. Often even a
writer's very life depended on his eagerness and ability. It didn't
cost the all-powerful kings and dukes anything to send an
untalented scribbler to the block if his writing didn't suil them.
And there was another powerful stimulus: rewards, honors,
scientific titles, and the benevolence of the monarchs. (By the
way, this is the case in our time, too). Not long ago, a certain
author maintained in his writing that the representatives of the
now ruling houses of Europe are the descendants of Jesus Christ!
(Dmitriy Kalyuzhny and Aleksandr Zhabinskiy "The Other History
of Wars"). They complemented him for it and the English prince
even conferred some awards.
But let us return to Joseph Scaliger, the founder of the
traditional chronology who lived and labored in that epoch. At
that time, in addition to dynastic difficulties, the matter of the
origin of the European peoples was one of the most pressing

69
concerns. They were in the proccss of becoming "peoples" in the
modern sense of the word, and each of them, naturally, wanted to
know who the ancestors were.
Their antecedents were gathered from various sources:
Biblical, Greek and Barbarian, that is, German and English. The
Trojan version of the origin of the French was popular. The
historians situated the centers of ancient cultures in their works
not only in Greece and Rome, but also in Spain, England and
France. Everything depended on where the writers were living.
The very fundamental requirements for roots were equal and
common everywhere: the more ancient these could be, the better,
and the more "antique" the writings that lent these support, the
more convincing the account.
After the destruction of Rome by the forces of Charles V (1527),
there appeared so many new versions of the origin of the European
nations that Anthony Grafton, author of a book about Seal iger,
compared the historical science of that time with a mirrored labyrinth
in which it is impossible to understand and determine anything.
Joseph Scaliger (1540 - 1609), philosopher, analyst of ancient texts
and mathematician, decided to put everything in order. He didn't
erect his historical edifice in a void, but to a significant degree,
adhered to the generally accepted ideas of his epoch. In palticular,
to the very popular idea of the "succession of kingdoms" or the
"succession of monarchies". According to this idea, some kind of a
center of worldwide supremacy - a capital of the main king, of an
emperor, existed from the very beginning of human history. Over
time, this changed its location several times.
As a result, the history somehow was divided into three parts
- three monarchies. The first was called the Babylonian. At first
they called it Assyrian (Chaldean), then - Persian-Mcdean. But
the capital remained the same - Babylon.
The second is the Greek or Macedonian monarchy with the
capital in Alexandria. It had been thought, and even now it is
thought in traditional history, that the founder of the monarchy,
Alexander the Great made Alexandria his capital.
Finally, the Roman monarchy. They called it the last worldwide
monarchy. It was split into the Eastern and Western Roman
Empires and these, for their part, were broken up into a multitude
of independent states.

70
 ThiS was the over-arching schema. As the adherents of the new
chronology note, its traces are maintained in modern history textbooks.
Only instead of "monarchies" the term "succession of civilizations" is
used. The first civil.iUltion arose in the area between two rivers - the
"Babylonian Kingdom," then "ancient" Greece appeared, AND, finally
- Italy - the "Roman Empire". Gleb Nosovskiy, Anatoliy Fomenko "A
New Chronology of Russia, England and Rome").
If one tries to examine the idea of the "three kingdoms" in
more detail, then questions unavoidably arise. Out of what was
the idea of worldwide monarchies born? Why in particular are
there three of them and not two or five? On what grounds were
the kingdoms placed in the pages of the historic works, in particular
in such an order and not in any other?
The adherents of the traditional chronology confidently assert
that these questions are settled by archaeological research, analysis
of the writings of the ancient authors, linguistic investigations and
so on and so forth. In addressing these questions in particular,
scholars over many generations have created truly vast libraries of
works. Hundreds of books, dissertations, surveys, and abstracts
written, for example, one after the other about Ancient Greece alone.
Is it possible their authors relied on sources which didn't contain a
grain of truth, that didn't reflect the real situation of things? Such
doesn't happen, they tell us. And they will be right.
The inventive nature of "ancient" sources consists not in the
fact that the events described in them and their heroes are
imaginary, but in the fact that these events, which occurred in the
Middle Ages, have been renamed and spread over various epochs
and countries in order to advance the ideological and othcr
interests of wealthy and powerful clients.
In connection with this, the notion of a "worldwide monarchy"
is of sjX'Cial interest for us. In Scaliger's epoch there were no such
monarchies. There existed instead, as we have already noted, a
multitude of independent states. From where then did the ide.'l of "a
center of worldwide supremacy" come? I doubt that it came from the
imagination of historians. The memory of such a center of such a
monarchy was still very fresh in the 16th century. Yes, there had
been a worldwide empire, and very recently at that; both the states
which subsequently arose on its ruins and the lives of the people
themselves still bore the indelible impression of this grandiose state

71
structure, the first in history: the Byzantine Empire.
With respect to the number of "worldwide empires", it needs
to be said that Scaliger and his predecessors didn't so much invent
history as compute it. They did these using methods of
historiography which seem very strange today - numerology, cabala
and astrology. Scaliger's older contemporary, Jean Boden, composed
a solid work, "A Method of Easy Determination of History", in
which he showed in particular, how, in his opinion, to detect empires.
He wrote: "The square of 12 is 144, and the cube is 1728. Not
one empire in its existence exceeded the value of the sum of these
numbers, therefore, the larger numbers should be rejected. Of thc
spherical numbers included in the great number there are four· 125,
216, 625 and 1,296. With the aid of several of these numbers ... we
permit ourselves to study the miraculous changes of almost all states...
Starting with the cube of 12, we shall find that the monarchy of the
Assyrians from King Ninus to Alexander the Great embodies this
number precisely... It would be more accurate to say that a single
monarchy of the Assyrians and Persians existed than there allegedly
ex.isted two different monarchies. In a different case, we are supposed
to distinguish the kingdom of the Chaldeans, Medians and Parthians
from the Assyrian-Persian monarchy" ...
It is impossible to distinguish one from another: otherwise, the
great number will be broken. That is, the author discovered an
entircworld empire,as they say,at theUp of a pen,as a century later
the astronomers Leverrier and Adams calculated the existence of
the planet Neptune. Actually, this sort of "perception of history" is
an extraordinarily easy method. It produces the "discovery", as we
have just seen, of a strictly limited number of empires.
Relying on an understanding of numerology, the author also
easily and naturally finds other chronological dates of various
states in antiquity. He juggles the names like a magician:
"As regards the cube of seven, there also are many examples.
This number was chosen by Moses for the establishment of a great
fesUval. From the victory of the Jews over Haman with the aid of
Esther to the victory over Antioch, 343 years had passed, and both
that and the other victory were gained on the 13th day of the 12th
month, which the Jews call Adar ... That same number of YC.lrs had
passed from the time, when Augustus I established control, until the
time when Constantine the Great achieved domination. The

72
kingdom of the Persians, from Cyrus to Alexander, lasted 210 years •
a number which is formed from 30 whole 5Cvens."
The whole book is built on such arguments. For Boden, history
is not the past of mankind, but a design created as a result of
mani pulations with numbers. He is a faithful adherent of the Masons
and numerologists, who impart a mystical essence to numbers.
It wouldn't be worth talking about Boden's exercises if they
hadn't been subsequently used and developed in the works of
Scaliger and his followers, especially Petavius. These are the
astrologers, numerologists and prophets who laid out the foundation
of the traditional chronology. This is an important point. One
must remember that other methods for the analysis of history didn't
exist then. There were not, and could not be, any other fundamental
outlines besides those sort forth in the Bible and in a number of
mystical studies.
Thus, numerology for Scaliger and his followers is not a mind
game of dubious validity, but a serious method of historic analysis.
It should be recognized that they were attempting a task of
grandiose complexity: they were formulating nothing less than an
overall master plan of the development of all world history! No
one after them has ever undertaken such a fundamental problem.
Multi-volume writings have been subsequently produced which
essay the historical overview of the majority of countries and
peoples, but these are all erected upon the foundation established
by Scalger and Petavius.
It is especially important to note in this context that this
same structural-forming medieval design also underlies the theory
of historic cycles.
The names of quite a number of adherents to this theory have
been preserved. Traditional historiography distributes them
throughout various epochs and peoples - in Ancient Greece, in
Rome, in Cbina and in Central Asia. The Roman historian Polybius
supposedly, before the Christian Era, wrote a 40 volume "General
History" which was based on the concept of "historic cycles".
Polybius and bis confederates visualized the history of society
as a rotation; a fixed orbit with periodic returns to the starting
point. In this conception, the historical path taken by mankind
only traces an endless circle in time.
Then, as an understanding of the cycle as a spiral began to

73
prevail, the repetition of analogous but distinct phases in a forward
movement, an undulating and progressive development began to be
noted. (Yuriy Yakovets "Cycles. Crises. Forecasts". 1999). As is
explained in various books on "cycles", all great phenomena and
facets of life also have their own "spirals", and each country, it is
clear, do also. These spirals are superimposed on each other endlessly,
resembJjng, as a whole, entangled turns of barbed wire.
We will not examine the validity of such a vision of history.
Perhaps it has its own arguments which support it. Let us say
only that it too now is enjoying relative popularity. In the times
of Scaliger it was overwhelming. It allowed the chronologists to
arrange historical events as the theory suggested. And if they
discovered that in the coil of "ancient" Greece there was no event
similar to one which happened in their time, then they simply
sent a duplicate of it into antiquity. Since history repeats itself
anyhow, at the critical point the very same thing must have simply
happened without anyone having recorded it.
At the same time, history was required to have been sufficiently
consistent to allow the fabrication of solid and convincing
genealogical rulers - to fill the past, as if it were, with significant
events which would have great moral and educational significance
for their descendants. Scaliger and his followers in the literal
sense of the word created history and were convinced that they
were doing a good thing.
Such "history" as this, unfortunately, is manufactured in all
epochs, including ours, and in all countries, recasting the past into
accordance with present political interests.
Let us look at how the medieval reality of "ancient" Greece
was reflected in history. What do we know about this country?
We know, to our delight, much. To our delight, because none
of the originals of the "ancient Greek" writings ever were in the
hands of even the most conscientious researchers. Some are only
references in works ascribed to various chroniclers, frequently also
to figures of legend. At that, these works appeared after the
millennium of the "Dark Ages", when no one and nowhere recalled
anything about a Greece or a Rome. In the Middle Ages themselves
the ancient historians and the poets like Homer, the various myths
and legends and myths - all appeared out of nowhere. Where
they had been hidden during the many supposedly intervening

74
centuries, no one knows. And they still say that there are no
miracles in the world!
But we will not find fault.
The traditional view is: the history of Ancient Greece starts from
the turn of the 3rd and 2nd millennia B.G. • from the rise of the first
state formations all the island of Crete, and ends in the 2nd - 1st
centuries B.C., when the Greek and Hellenistic states of the Eastern
Mediterranean were conquered by Rome and incorporated into the
Roman Empire.
We shall single out several striking moments in this history
from among the best known of them. One is the Trojan War,
described in the poems of the great blind poet, Homer. Historians
have been drawing from them over the centuries this and that
conclusion concerning the past. The poems "Iliad" and "Odyssey"
became, in and of themselves, the source of an entire period of
Greece's history.
The Trojan War, as the traditional historians write, was a war of
the Achaeans against the Trojans at the end of the 13th centwy B.C.
According to mythological tradition, the causus belli was the
abduction by Paris, the son of the Trojan king Priam, of the beautiful
Helen, the wife of the King of Sparta, Menelaus. At once, irregular
forces of kings from almost all the areas and cities of Greece who at
some time had laid claim to Helen's hand and were connected by a
vow to always aid him whose wife she became, were assembled.
According to "Iliad" there were 100,000 warriors in the Achaean
force,and 1,186 ships.
An attempt La obtain Helen's return by negotiations (the
embassy of Menelaus and Odysseus to Priam) failed, and a siege of
the city began, which lasted more than 9 years.
The events of the final, 10th year of the waf make up the
content of "Iliad." Apollo's priest, Chryses, asked Agamemnon to
return to him a daughter who had been taken captive, Chryseis,
but was refused. Apollo, who had been aiding the Trojans, inflicted
a plague upon the Achaean forces. 1n order to propitiate the god,
Agamemnon returned Chryses' daughter, but in exchange took
Briseis from Achilles as his prisoner. The angry Achilles refused
to take part in the war. The Achaeans began to meet with failure
after this, and many heroes were casualties.
Only when the Trojans burst into the Achaean camp and

75
began to threaten theships did Achilles send his friend Patrodus,
having given him his own armor. The Trojans ran for the protection
of the fortress walls, but Patrodus died by Heelor's hand. Achilles,
avenging his friend and in ncw armor forged by Hephaestus, entcred
the battle and killed Hector, desecrating his body. Hector's father,
the old Priam, on coming to Achilles prayed for the return of his
son's body. At the sight of the father's grief, Achilles softened
and gave back Hector's body. "Iliad" ends with the funerals of
Patroel us and Hector.
Excavations in the places referred to in the myths about the
Trojan War confirm the historicity of a huge military clash of
Achaeans with the tribes of the northwestern part of Asia Minor
in the beginning of the 13th Century B.C. So write the traditional
historians.
They suppose that the fall of Troy occurred in 1225 B.C. The
precision of the date is astonishing whcn one considers that no
written sources that confirm it exist. Well, and when did Homer
live? According to the Columbia Encyclopedia (U.SJ, the poems
"Iliad" and "Odyssey" were written by the poet for an aristocratic
audience' in Asia Minor before 700 B.C. That is, if one is to believe
this report, the author lived 500 years after the war. Just how can
one write beautiful verses about events of so long ago? One can
expect everything from poets. But, you see, Homer didn't write
anything, not ever: he was bUnd. Moreover, his poems, written in
small print, take up 700 pages!
Let us assume, Homer possessed a staggering memory and
recalled all the lines composed by him. But you see, the poems
weren't written during down his lifctime as well. Commentators
report to readers that a special commission in Athens wrote down
the "Iliad" and "Odyssey" for the first time several hundred years
later. How then did these works get to the commission?
The traditional historiography promotes the following version:
fellow citizens of the poet learned by heart all 700 pages, then
retold them to new audiences, who in their own turn, to the next
generations, and thus' it was continued for several centuries.
For the sake of fairness, it must be sajd that the 20th century
Imows several outwardly similar cases. When the Kirghiz, who live
in Central Asia, rt'Ccived their written language for the first time (the
first half of the 20th century), their national oral cpos "Manas" finally

76
was fixed on paper, the text of which was handed down from
generation to generation. In Uzbekistan in that very same decade,
the "Alpamysh" cpos was written down. Musicians and poets used
special techniques and methods for the fixation of the famous Uzbek
"Makom", the popular sung legends of hoary antiquity.
It would seem, in relation to "Iliad" and "Odyssey," one also can
assume such a variant. But all the trouble is in the fact that these
poems over many centuries are the "Dark Ages"! - during these, they
were not known to anyone. The traditional historians themselves
write: "in medieval Europe, they knew Homer only through the
quotations and references from Latin writers and Aristotle. At the
end of the 14th century, the Italian humanists became more closely
acquainted with Homer... Only in 1723 did the first translation of
"Iliad" appear, done by the poet Anton Maria Salvini".
It is asked, where then was the text of the Homeric writings
for nearly 2,000 years? In whose heads were they kept? And did a
blind poet by the name of Homer exist in any event?
Vico (1668·1744), the author of the work "Principles of the
New Science concerning the Common Nature of Nations" thought
that the Homeric poems were written by various authors and in
various epochs. He, as also many others, started from the works
themselves. They were written as magnificent verse, polished to
perfection, and strike done with a wealth of vocabulary and
memorable expressions, and this testifies beyond controversy to
the fact that the author or authors were grounded in the solid
poetical traditions of their time. However, we know neither Homer's
predecessors nor followers. Still in the 20th century, there existed
the opinion that Homer created in proud solitude. On the other
hand, the composition of the poems is loose, full of long, drawn out
passages, unnecessary insertions and digressions, which don't relate
to the subject. For specialists, this is serious evidence of the fact
that more than one author had art and part in the creation of the
"Iliad" and the "Odyssey".
A question about the authorshi p of these was put forward in
1795 also by the German scholar, Friedrich August Wolf in a
forward to an edition of the Greek text of the poems. Wolf
considered the creation of a large cpos in an illiterate period as
impossible, suggesting that the taJes were created by various poets.
Scholars were divided into "analysts," followers of Wolrs theory

77
(the German scholars Karl Lachmann, A Kirchhoff with his theory
of "small eposes"; G. Herman and the English historian George
Grote with their "theory of the basic kernel", in Russia F.F.Zelinskiy
shared it) and the "unitarians", adherents of a strict unity of the
epos (the translator of Homer, Johann Heinrich Voss and the
philosopher Gregor Wilhelm Nietzsche, Friedrich Schiller, Johann
Wolfgang von Goethe, and Hegel in Germany, and N.LGnedich,
V.A.Zhukovsky and Alexander Sergeevich Pushkin in Russia).
At the same time, however, not one of them doubted that there
had actually been a Trojan War.
The archaeological excavations performed later, in particular
by Heinrich Schlie-mann, literally in accordance with Homer's poems,
also seemed to show that the Trojans at some time had been beaten
by the Achaeans there, precisely where the "Iliad" indicated.
Contemporary commentators of "Iliad" and "Odyssey" are
completely delighted with Schliemann:
"The sensational discoveries of Heinrich Schliemann in 1870-
'80 have shown that Troy, Mycenae and the Achaean strongholds
are not myths, but a reality. The consistencies of a number of bis
discoveries in the fourth tunneled tomb in Mycenae with Homer's
account& amazed Schliemann's contemporaries. The impression was
so strong that Homer's epoch for a long time began to be associated
with the period of the flourishing of Achaean Greece in the 14th -
13th centuries B.C."
However, in other works devoted to the Trojan War, the
traditional historians just as joyfully write:
"Like Columbus, he opened up a world more astonishing than
that which he had searched. These riches were many centuries
older than Priam and Hecuba; these graves were not the tombs of
the Atrides, but rujns of an Aegean civilization in continental
Greece, just as ancient as the Minoan epoch of Crete. While not
suspecting it himself, Schliemann confirmed the truth of Horace's
famous line: vixerunt fortes ante Agamemnona - "Brave men were
living even before Agamemnon".
So, finally, did Heinrich Schliemann discover Troy or something
else? No one knows. Indignation bursts from archaeologists when
they recall Heinrich Schliemann. They write that he was a self-
taught person, carried out digs while not observing any rules and
destroyed beyond hope whole cultural strata at the site of an ancient

78
settlement, which he arbitrarily called Troy.
As regard to the Trojan War itself, there turns out to be evidence
of its more immediate creators. These were Dictis and Dares
Phrygius. Only they didn't live in great antiquity, but in the
Middle Ages and wrote not in Greek, but in the L1tin language.
Even so, their "dry and monotonous account of the facts of the
siege" was thought of more highly in those times than "Homer's
incredible poem." Not just anybody writes in such terms, but
traditional historians themselves do.
The journals of Dictis and Dares gave birth in medieval Europe
to a multitude of works which are combined today under the title
of the "Trojan Cycle". And their fame ecli psed the fame of Homer
until the 17th century itself. "Dares Phrygius became one of the
most well-known writers of antiquity".
But, perhaps, Dictis and Dares also were invented? Nothing
like it. Both of them are mentioned in Homer's poems. If one
recalls tbat the text of "Iliad" and "Odyssey" appeared for the first
time only in the 14th century, then everything falls into place.
They really existed and really wrote their journals long before the
author or authors of the poems which afterwards mentioned them
in their own writings.
There is in the history of the Middle Ages an interesting fact:
supposedly in the 8-9th centuries A.D. at the court of Charlemagne
there lived the famous poet Englebert. And he bore the name of
Homer! Would he one way or the other give his own name to the
Greek variant of the descri ption of the Trojan War?
However, we won't insist on this, because there is another fact
worthy of mentioning. The 19th century German historian
Ferdinand Gregorovius in the thorough monograph, "A History of
the City of Athens in the Middle Ages," gives a detailed
alphabetized index of the names of rulers, heroes and warriors.
Among them is also the family Saint Homer, that is St. Homer,
who played a noticeable role in the history of Italy and Greece in
the 13th Century A.D. Representatives of this family were
participants of a "Trojan" war of the 13th century. It is fully
assumable that one or another of the representatives of this family
- a remarkable poet of the 14th - 15tb centuries - collected and
wrote down the family legends of the family of Homers about this
war in the form of the two grandiose epic poems.

79
 In any case, the "Iliad and Odyssey" are belated works of art
which were created in the Renaissance epoch as the poetic peak of
the whole "Trojan Cycle" (Gleb Nosovskiy, Anatoliy Fomenko "Russia
and Rome," Volume 1).
The Trojan War in "ancient" Greece is an imaginary reflection
of the Gothic War, which occurred in the early Middle Ages. A
detailed comparison of the two wars shows their coincidence even
in trifles. We shall cite some of the results of the research described
in the book "Russia and Rome".
The Trojan kingdom knows seven kings who ruled in sequence.
The first is the founder of the city and all the state. The fall of
Troy and the death of the kingdom occur during the seventh king.
The Roman Empire, described by Livy, also has seven emperors
who ruled in sequence. The first is the founder of the city and the
state. The kingdom comes to an end and Rome is turned into a
republic during the seventh.
Both wars are almost equal in length: the first - 10, the
second - 12 years.
The Trojan kingdom was destroyed twice. And these
destructions are the only ones in its history.
In the history of the Roman Empire (according to Livy) and
its duplicate - Roman Empire III (in the West), there also were two
destructions. The second and final is the Gothic War. These two
destructions are also those in the history of Roman Empire III.
The two newcomer-strangers Jason and Hercules destroyed
the first Trojan kjngdom "Newcomers from the West... captured
the city" ("Trojan Legends").
Thl7 two newcomer-strangers Odoacer and Theodoric destroyed
the "purely Roman" Empire (First Empire), having invaded from
the northwest.
After the first destruction, the Trojan empire, in essence, also
becomes Trojan: earlier it had been called the Dardano Settlement.
After the first destruction, the Roman Empire in the West changes
its name. It is turned into an Ostrogothic kingdom in Italy.
The Trojan name arose from the name of the new king, Troil, who
"built more than others in the city and gave it rus own name - Troy".
A new name appears at the end of the Roman Empire II - the
Emperor Trajan.
The newcomer Greeks complete the second and final

80
destruction of the Trojan kingdom.
The second and final destruction of the Roman Empire III in
the West also is the handiwork of the newcomer Greco-Romans.
The Trojan War flared up because of a woman - a so-called
offence to Helen, wife of Menelaus, is the cause.
The Tarquin War \V,IS caused by an offence to Lucretia. This is
most colorfully described by Livy. A quarrel breaks out between
the husband rulers of the kingdoms over whose wife is better. "Each
extremely praises his own", and the quarrel soon developed into an
armed conflict.
In the tale about Troy, Paris kidnaps Helen by force.
According to Livy, Sextus Tarquinius seizes Lucretia and
dishonors her ...
Don't let the numbering of Roman Empires I, 11 and III be
confusing. [n the opinion of the adherents of the new chronology,
the real Holy Roman Empire was in the 13th - 15th centuries. The
others are displaced by the traditional historiography into various
centuries and arc the imaginary concoctions of the tvliddle Ages.
The parallels between the Trojan and Gothic wars arc endless.
Even the famous episode with the Trojan horse coincides.
What is known about it? It is so huge that several hundred
warriors \vere able to find room inside it. It stands on wooden
legs. It in some way got into the city. In "Iliad" it says that the
stupid Trojans pulled it into Troy. This is as absurd as the
historical joke about the fad that the shepherds of ancient Greece
were singing Homer's verses for several hundred years while
educated people didn't write down the poems. (Dmitriy Kalyuzhny
and Aleksandr Zhabinskiy).
Is there anything similar in the Gothic war? Of course, The
Greeks also used guile in the storming of Naples (New Town or New
Rome). which they had not been able to take in any way. They
penetrated it at night through a huge, recently deserted aqueduct
which was a stone tunnel with an exit beyond the fortress walls. In
the morning they opened the gates, and the troops of the attackers
slaughtered the still sleeping defenders of the city.
The evidence of the fact that the famous Trojan horse is the
poetic form of the real aqueduct water supply is not complicated.
The first Trojan chronicles which reached us, as we recall, were
written in Latin. And in Latin the word "horse" is written "equa,"

81
and water is "aqua". That is, practically the same. Moreover, the
word aqueduct - "aqua-ductio" - "that which conducts water" is
identical to the word "he who leads a horse" - "equa-ductio". A
difference only in one vowel.
Therefore, aqueduct also was changed into a perception of the
late foreign authors who confused one vowel, in horse, which called
into being the blossoming of absurd legends about the Trojan horse.
It must be said that there are a lot of similar events in literature
which concern literature (only) and not actual history. Here we
only mention the best-known. We already have noted that in the
translation of the Old Testament from Hebrew to Greek the Reed
Sea, along the bottom of which Moses led the Jews during the
Exodus from Egypt, was turned into the Red Sea, and even remains
so in the text of the Scri pture to this day.
There also is another famous example, but it is somewhat
amusing. Charles Perrault, the author of the world-renowned tale
"Cinderella," was not writing in the least about a glass slipper
which fell off the heroine's foot at the ball. He was writing about
a lady sli pper, edged with fur. But in the translation from the
French, the lady sli pper by mistake became a glass sli pper,and this
was so in keeping with the spirit of the tale, that the sli pper has
stayed in it forever.
And so the aqueduct in the passing of centuries in the poems
was changed into the Trojan horse.
Let us continue, however, the journey through the history of
Greece.
The classical period of this story, according to the accepted
periodization, embraces the time from the threshold of the 6th and
5th centuries to 338 B.C.
Greece had to defend its distinctive character and right to
exist in a struggle with the Achaemenid power, which was expanding
into the West. Let us chose one moment in this battle:
In 480 B.C.,a huge Persian army and navy under the leadershi p
of King Xerxes invaded Greece. Despite the heroic resistance of
a detachment of Spartans headed by King Leonidas in the
Thermopylae ravine, the Persians broke through to Central Greece.
The population of Athens fled, the conquerors captured the city
and plundered it.
The main events occurred in 479 B.C., when the Persians

82
endured two defeats - both on the land and at sea. Greece had
been able to defend its independence.
The legendary battle at Thermopylae of 300 Spartans with the
Xerxes hordes is well known to the whole civilized world. It is
glorified in many works as an example of fearlessness and bravery
of a people in a struggle for the freedom and independence of their
country. The "father of history" Herodotus wrote about it in his
monumental work, "The Histories", which is devoted mainly to the
wars of the Greeks with the Persians.
But whether there was such a battle in actual fact and rcally
whether Herodotus lived in the 5th century B.C. evokes deep
and well-founded doubts. Having glanced at Ferdinand
Gregorovius' writing devoted to medieval Greece, we will find
there a detailed descri ption of the same battle. With only one
difference: instead of the Spartans, 300 knights were active in it.
The events in the Middle Ages developed according to the
same plan as with "antiquity". (According to the "historic cycle"!)
Byzantine and Turkish forces attack the country (1275 A.D.)
Much about them is curious, a navy supports them from the sea.
They surround the city of Neopatria. The city's ruler, having safely
escaped and stealing his way through Thermopylae to Duke Jean
la Roche, asks him for help. The latter gathers 300 well armed
knights and meets the aggressors in the Thermopylae ravine. By
the way, among the knights is Lord de Saint Homer, that is, of the
Homers. But this is an aside.
At the sight of the large numbers of enemy, Jean la Roche
pronounces the famous phrase: "Many people, but few men." It is
well known by the fact that, it turns out, the Persian King Xerxes
pronounced it 1,800 years before the duke, when he was preparing
to battle with the 300 Spartans. Here are Herodotus' precise words:
"Then, one can say, it became clear to all, and especially to the
king himself, that the Persians have many people, but among them
the men are few".
An absolute coincidence. Therefore, it cannot be accidental.
Ferdinand Gregorovius is in some confusion from such a turn: "It
seems to me that these words are borrowed from Herodotus ...
Although this expression was able to enter the duke's head simply
at the sight of a similar state of affairs. The author, naturally. is in
no condition even to imagine that it is a question of one and the

83
same battle, and that, most likely, Herodotus was writing his book
not in great antiquity, but as early as after the battle at Thermopylae,
not earlier than the 14th century. Otherwise, he would not have
found out what the most gallant and worthy duke had said.
Ferdinand Gregorovius generally notes quite a few coincidences
that occurred in the Middle Ages, with the period of "antiquity".
For example, of the sort: "Suleiman, the valiant son of Orhan, crossed
the Hellespont by the dark of night in 1345... Here for the first time
the Turks gained a foothold on European soil. The Byzantines
compared this horde of conquerors with the Persians and even
called them that same name". That which they were comparing is
not surprising: people always compare something with something.
But the fact that they called the Turks Persians defies any
explanation. This in any case is what the German masses of the
Second World War called the French, recalling Napoleon's
campaigns.
The next famous event in Ancient Greece is the Peloponnesian
War of 431 • 404 S.c. It is described in detail by Thucydides, a
military leader and Greek historian of that time, in "The History of
the Peloponnesian War". The traditional historiography reports
that his work became will known in Europe thanks to the Latin
translation of Lorenzo Valla and to the English of Thomas Hobbes.
That is, according to historic measurements. quite recently. To where
did this book disappear over the centuries until it became well-
known in Europe? Traditional historiography is keeping quiet.
The historians are saying nothing because of the fact that the
views of Thucydides, who is well-known for his aphorisms, are
very close to the logical creations of the father of political science,
Niccolo Machiavelli (1469-1527 A.D.), who thought that in history
one must search for methods of strengthening sovereign power
and that its main goal is to serve the interests of the rulers.
Thucydides expressed himself more abstractly, but he thought the
same way: "History is a philosophy in examples". With such an
approach there cannot even be talk about an objective account of
the movement of events that took place. This is a view of a medieval
historian who worked to advance certain goals. This although
between Thucydides and Machiavelli, in the opinion of the
traditional chronology. is the abyss of centuries.
Let us look at what Thucydides writes.

84
 In 431 B.C., a war broke out between the Peloponnesian and
Athenian naval allies, which had seized all of Greece and received
the name of the Peloponnesus. It continued, with a short period
of truce all of 27 years, but Thucydides told only about the first 20
years.
Adherents of the new chronology think that well-known
medieval war in Greece (1374 . 1387), which led to the death of
the Catalan state on this country's territory, was its original.
The people of Navarre and the Athenians partici pate in the
14th century war. A most huge congress preceded it, at which
delegates from all the areas of Greece had gatllered.
Sparta and Athens collide in the Peloponnesian War. The
congress of deputies of the Pcloponnesian Alliance preceded it.
In both cases, the war started a year after the meetings.
In the Middle Ages, the Peloponnesian and Corinthians invade
the enemy's territory first. The Corinthian principality is the
strongest in Peloponnesia in that epoch.
The Spartans (Peloponnesians) headed by the Peloponnesian
Alliance attack Athens.
In both cases, Athens held out in the first military period.
[n both cases the war bears a violent nature. Both Gregorovius
and Thucydides write about it.
At the end of the war of the 14th century, Nerio Acciaiuoli
becomes the leader. A successful military leader, a fine di plomat.
His forces capture Athens in particular.
At the end of the Peloponnesian War, the Spartan fleet
commander Lysander advances into first place. A successful
military leader, a fine di plomat. He destroyed the Athenian
state in particular.
The storming of Athens in both cases is identical.
The victor Nerio establishes a new political order - tyranny.
He is now called "the Athenian Tyrant".
After the victory, Lysander introduces in Athens "the tyranny
of the thirty". This period in the history of the ancient city also is
called: "the government of the thirty tyrants"...
The coincidences fall as if from the horn of plenty in the
hands of the goddess Gaia.
The fact that brought itself to the attention of the adherents
of the new chronology is that Thucydides in his "History" described

85
three eeli pses which occurred in the Mediterranean Sea area during
the war. In as much as ecli pses occur with invariable precision
and regularity over the course of thousands and thousands of years,
it appeared possible to determine exactly wbich centuries, and in
particular in which years these astronomical shows took place. It
turned out that in the temporal segment from 900 B.C. to 1700
A.D. there are only two precise astronomical possibilities, and
both of them arc in the 11th century. In the first calculation - for
the 1039th, 1046th and 1057th years. In the second, for the 1113th,
1140th and 1t51st years. In both cases, the triad covers 18 years
each and the intervals between the eeli pses coincide. There has
not been such a triad of eeli pses in the last 2,600 years of precise
astronomical calculations.
It is useless to argue with astronomy. Therefore, one may say
unambiguously that there were no such ecli pses in ancient Greece.
Consequently, there wasn't even the Peloponnesian War itself.
True, the ecli pses also don't occur for the years of the medieval
war. But as has been discovered by the adherents of the new
chronology, a displacement of temporal segments happened steadily
in the traditional historiography, called chronological shifts, when
several real events are mixed up onto one whole and later placed
in the distant past.
The mathematical methods used in the analysis of tradWonal
history have shown that these shifts and carry-overs are not random.
They have approximately the same magnitude and are found in
hundreds of cases. And what is more, they are completely in
accordance with both the "historic cycles" and Masonic numerology
with its magical numbers. The graphical representation of the
Scaliger chronology, created by contemporary scholars, even looks
on the surface like symbols of masonry - the compass (Greek history)
and the set square (Roman history.) This, as Dmitri Kalyuzhny
and Aleksandr Zhabinsky write, is the "composite center" of Scaliger
history. ("The Other History of Wars").
Moving further along the time scale, we come to Alexander the
Great. In the traditional history it is recounted that a new force
gradually ri pened in the north of Greece - the Macedonian Empire.
With King Phillip II (359 - 336 B.C.) it achieved power
that had been unknown earlier.
Athens led a battle with Phillip. But, despite desperate

86
resistance, they suffered defeat.
As early as with Alexander's father war starts with the
Persians. However, the murder of Phillip in 336 B.c. postponed
the realization of the Eastern Crusade for some time. Having come
to the throne, Alexander cruelly dealt with the father's killers and
possible pretenders to the throne.
Tn the spring of 334 B.C., the Macedonian army and allied
Greek detachments ferry to Asia Minor. Alexander's army was
considerably inferior numerically to the Persian, but won after a
pitched battle, and the way to Asia Minor was opened to Alexander.
Having finished its conquest, Alexander entered Northern Syria.
Here he had once again to meet with Persian forces - this time King
Darius III himself stood at their head. The Macedonians succeeded
in winning the battle that ensued in the fall of 333 B.C. near Issa...
Later, Alexander captured the Phoenician Coast, where Tyre
rendered the most stubborn resistance, but in 332 the city was taken
by storm. The capture of Ga7A opened the way to Egypt, the Satrap
of which, not having sufficient forces for resistance, surrendered.
During his stay in Egypt, Alexander founded a city in the Nile
delta, giving it his own name. He completed a pilgrimage to the
oracle of Ammon in the desert, priests of whom declared Alexander
as the son of Ammon, having recognized, consequently, his divine
parentage. Thus his power ovcr Egypt received a divine basis.
In the spring of 331 B.C., Alexander moved to th~ north.
Crossing the Euphrates and the Tigris, he approached the small
town of Gaugamcla, and here on 1 October 331 B.C. occurred the
decisive battle. Although the Persian army was stronger than at
Issa, the Macedonians succeeded in routing it.
Now Alexander already had been dreaming about worldwide
rule. He had conquered vast areas along the Indus River, but
nevertheless, he did not succeed in completing the Indian campaign.
The army, exhausted by the campaign, refused to go further. Alexander
turned back with the remnants of his army to Babylon.
The killg's policy at that time was directed at the unification of
his huge state. A broad campaign for the founding of new cities in
the conquered territories is put into practice (Alexander viewed
them as the strong points of his power.) He also was preparing for
new campaigns. However, at the high point of these preparations,
Alexander dies in 323 B.C. from a fever at the age of 33.

87
 A nne subjecl, worthy of the pen of a great writer. A whole
epic, compressed by lIS to the dimensions of one page. But, alas, it
is not original. The empire of Alexander the Great has too many of
the same features as the Osman (Ottoman) Empire, which was
founded in the 15th Century by Mahomet II. He conquered
countries just as it is described in the legends about the
Macedonian. In a comparison of the maps of the Osman Empire
and the Macedonian empire, it is clearly visible that the European
and Mediterranean borders of both conquests practically coincide.
There are overly curious pages in the medieval writings and
manuscri pts connected with the Macedonian and Mahomet II. In
some Turkish documents of that time, MaJlOlllet II is glorified as
Alexander! In others - of European origin· Alexander the Gre'lt, as we
already have mentioned, pays compliments· to France (J) Monks are
present with crosses and thuribles during the funeral of the great
conqueror. From the point of view of the traditional historians, all of
this is absolute nonsense.
It is not difficult to understand the contemporary historians
when they write, that in the Middle Ages "the notion of
chronological consistency almost was lost.. .. Everything in this
world takes on a fantastic coloring. The coarsest anachronisms
and the strangest fabrications get along peacefully". The basis for
such a conclusion is the same: the medieval evidence does not
correspond to the layouts of Scaliger and Petavius. Well, and
since they do not correspond, then, const.'<Juently, in the Middle
Ages everyone was going crazy together and had undertaken to
write history. And the medieval author, Fredegarius Scholasticus
even pointed to King Priam (from the legendary Troy!) as a
personage of a previous generation. Scholasticus already had fully
lost his bearings in the centuries and the adherents of the traditional
chronology arc at a loss how to react.
As we sec, the documents of that time are full of names which
supposedly belonged to distant ancestors. This seems absurd and
laughable, because today the notion reigns that in the Middle Ages
names were distributed that weren't in "antiqUity". A mistaken
notion. Books, messages, and letters of that time are evidence of it.
For example, Georgius Phrantzae in "History" names his
contemporaries: Antioch, Oemetrios, Dionysius, Minos, Cleope and
so forth. Nil Sinayskiy in that very same period writes letters to

88
the monks Demosthenes, Apollosius, Aristocles, Aristarchus and the
like. An obvious "antiquity"! But it shows only that not only various
events, but also the names of their heroes were replicated and referred
to in the distant past, according to the historic cycles. (Anatoliy
Fomenko, Gleb Nosovskiy "Which Century Is It Now?").
In history textbooks it is emphasized that the time of Alexander
the Great was noted by many important achievements in Greek
literature, science, philosophy and art, and it is connected with the
creation of such prominent thinkers of antiquity as, for example,
Plato and Aristotle. And generally, then a significant phenomenon
sprang up in the history of ancient Greece which was called the
Hellenic period. It is accept<1ble to examine it as the expansion of
Greek culture in the countries conquered by the Macedonian.
The 15th century A.D. is in no way distinguished from
antiquity in this regard. The fall of Byzantium and Greece and
the formation of the Osman Empire caused the Hellenism of the
Medieval era, which is well known in history, to spread throughout
all Europe. Ferdinanda Gregorovius writes:
"From the moment of the fall of Hellas, the story of the Greeks
is split: one into their enslaved motherland, the other into exile.,.
they came to be resettled in strange countries in masses. The West
accepted them hospitably ... Their religious aristocracy found
refuge in the capitals and in the educational institutions of Italy,
bringing Greek literature here anew".
Everything is correct except the word "anew," There was
nothing "anew", everything was for the first time. And that which
is ascribed to antiquity is a duplicate of medieval events and
personalities, A duplicate even of Plato.
Supposedly it is known of traditional history that "Plato
was the greatest representative of the idealistiC school in ancient
Greek philosophy, He created the Academy - a school of
philosophy in which his students were united. The notion of
ideas became the basis of Plato's instruction· of the eternal and
unchanging image patterns of things, the weak reflections of which
are the subjects of the real world" (Encyclopedia).
It is thought that his instruction died in order to reappear
several hundred years later in the famous Plotinus (205 - 270 A.OJ.
His name, it is clear, is absolutely accidental, and practically identical
to Plato's name. Then Platonicism again for some reason dies, in

89
order to be reborn as early as the 15th century in the teaching... of
Picton! He also is almost Plato and also a famous philosopher, writer
and public figure.
For fullness of the picture, let us say that Plato's ideas appear
out of nowhere for the first time in palticular in the 15th century, at
the high point of Pleton's activity, and that Pleton organizes in
Italy, in Florence, the Pleton Academy - an exact analogue of the
ancient Platonic Academy. And the fact is of interest that Pleton
writes "Utopia," as did Plato, and also "A Treatise on Laws", following
in everything bis own "ancient" predecessor, the author of the treatise
"Laws". At the same time, the Pleton of the 15th century, as also the
ancient Plato, promotes the idea of an ideal state.
The traditional historians know all this well. All the examples
cited by us have been taken from their own works. It would seem
the conclusions suggest themselves: the ancient Plato is the duplicate
of the medieval Picton! But no, it is impossible to violate Scaliger's
chronology, and therefore, Plotinus and Picton are declared
Neoplatonists, that is, followers of Plato.
The development of art in the 4th century B.C. reflects the
new phenomena of Greek society; it is said in the solid works
devoted to antiquity. Greek sculpture knows many prominent
masters (Scopas, Leochares,Bryaxis, PraxiteJes,and Lysi ppus). Their
works supposedly have been found as a result of various excavations,
often just "by accident." Travelers bring them to museums and
merchants sell them travelers who, heaven knows by which roules,
have obtained these "antiques" from some kind of unknown
secondhand dealer.
But here is the trouble: from time to time it turns out that some
or the other works are counterfeit. From century to century skilled
craftsmen are discovered who work "like the old days" in order to
carn their daily liVing. A great number of books have been written
about the counterfeit industry, no less fascinating than the detective
stories of famous writers. At that, they tell only about those cases
when counterfeits have been discovered. And how many have not
been discovered! Here are only several subjects.
We already have talked about the origin of a series of "ancient"
sculptures. Even the great Michelangelo sinned wilh counterfeits
in his youth. He created a figllrinc of Cupid and at the suggestion
of a friend sold it as an antique origin<ll. The forgery presently was

90
uncovered, but the sculptor was already well known: they thought
that he was able to "ascend to the mastery of the ancient sculptors".
The famous Benvenuto Cellini told in his own autobiography
how he created vases which were declared as antique: "By this
little job 1 obtained much". There were sculptors who even
specialized in this source of counterfeits. One of them was so
successful that he merited the nickname Antico.
Israel Rouchomovsky was famous in the 19th century, the author
of a whole series of "antiques." The Louvre bought the "tiara of
Saitapharnes" from him for 200,000 francs as an original of 3rd
century B.C. Grecian art. Only later did it become clear that the
figures on the tiara were copied from pictures out of an atlas of
cultural history published in 1882. They were made so skillfully
that they didn't believe Rouchomovsky when he announced his
authorshi p of the tiara. Then he produced a series of "antiques" of
his own productions and the museum gave in.
They called Alceo Dessena the king of the antique forgery. He
had a special workshop which flooded the worldwide market with
counterfeit antiquities: "Athenian" statues, sculptures "a la Gothic,"
and statuettes "three thousand years old." Afterward Dossena
exposed himself. The fact is that he, as did Rouchomovsky, had
been using the services of a firm for marketing in "antiquities" and
became dissatisfied that they paid him so little. And he decided to
take revenge. But they didn't believe him! Then, in 1927, he shot a
film about how he made an "antique" statue of a goddess. Only here
did he convince everyone.
In 1937, a certain Honan, while plowing a field not far from
Brizet, found a marble statue of Venus. Specialists unanimously
proclaimed it a work of the first century B.C. Honon received
250,000 francs for a "creation of Praxiteles or Phidias". But in
1938, the sculptor Francesco Cremonese declared that he had hidden
a statue of his own execution in a field. And he proved this. And
he had completed the forgery in order to show to everyone of
what he was capable as a sculptor.
Though, as regards "ancient" sculptures and other works of
"antiquity", one can manage even without these examples. It is
enough just to glance into the textbooks and study aids for specialists
who talk about the properties of natural stones.
Here is what is said about marble: "A stone, like metals, subject

9\
to corrosion. The stone's corrosion appears in the form of peeling,
splitting, swelling and a loosening of the rock, the appearance of
cracks, splotchiness, cavities and scabbings, discoloration or
coloration of the stone's surface in dark tones, the appearance of
brown and greenish spots of organic origin.
Among damages of the surface layer one also can pick out a
sugary and scaly destruction of the stone. The sugary disintegration
of marble is caused by the uneven disintegration of the surface
layer. At the same time, the rough surface of the stone resembles the
texture of sugar.
... It is nccesS<1.ry to note that the Italian, Greek, and Turkish
classifications of the stone do not use the term "marbleized limestone".
An overwhelming quantity of limestone is called marble".
The durability of limestone is 120 years. The durability of real
marble is up to 300 years! It is worth scrutinizing marble sculptures
which are displayed in museums as authentic works of two millennia
ago and right away it will become clear when they were made.
And, finally, about archaeological monuments. For the start,
let's say that the first catalogue of inscri ptions and local names of
monuments in Athens was established just in the middle of the
15th century. But the fateful lot of a majority of originals befell
it: the catalog was lost! If one doesn't know that in particular the
traces of the subsequent forgeries were wi perl out, then one may

Rare photo of Acropolis. 1865. You can se9 Jots of shambles. Huge piles of sfone and
macadam, which "flowing oown" in some places from tho walls of fortress. On the left of
the picture you can see a medieval tower. Acropolis as others buildings wera IrBnsfofTTIed
from medieval ruin to antic one. All neighboring buildings were destroyed.

think that the evil fate from the Greek myths had risen in earnest
in the Middle Ages. Contemporary specialists are acquainted only

92
with the mention of the catalog in the works of the latest authors.
Ferdinand Grcgorovius notes, "Over the course of time, the
original names of the majority of ancient Athenian monuments, of
which in many cases only individual ruins remained, were
forgotten." One can understand the historian's assertion. According
to his ideas, the monuments had to be those named in the "ancient"
writings. And living people were calling them by other names!
That means that they had forgotten the original names. Ferdinand
Gregorovius does not offer othcr alternatives. That they must
have named the monuments themselves is, in the opinion of the
traditional historians, absurd. They considered the rClIlnants of
thc Olympion in those days as a basilica, "sincc no onc kncw that it
is the ruins of the oncc world renowned temple of Olympus. Ciriacus
(the compiler of thc first catalog) calls these tremendous ruins
'Adrian's palace,' as thc Athenians themselves called it..."
In 1678, Babin didn't know where the temple of Zeus was in
Athens; the Academy, Lyceum, Stoa and gardens of EpicUfl,lS had all
disappeared without a trace. In the times of Ciriaclls, they called
some kind of a group of basilicas "the Academy," the location of
which it is impossible to determine ... They located the Lyceum or
Aristotle's didascalion in the ruins of the theatre of Dionysus...
Ciriacus copied the Greek inscri pUon here, not mentioning the great
philosopher... The ruins near Callirboc turned out to be the remnants

Rare photo of Acropolis. 1860. It is the view o( the part o( Acropolis after a destruction
Medieval bulwarks. You can see a foundation of Athenaeum's temple and Medieval rower
I:Jehind it. The rower would be destroyed some later. You can't fined any traces of rhe
Middle Ages.

93
of Aristophanes' stage.
The traditional historiography, thus, supposes that not only were
the authors of the medieval writings great muddleheaded persons
and dreamers, but also simply the residents of Athens. The whole
world knew of the Olympic temple, but they didn't even guess that
it was located in their home town. And they didn't have the slightest
idea where the Academy and the gardens of Epicurean were located.
Moreover, they considered the great comedian Aristophanes almost
as their own contemporary. As they did far too many other figures
of "antiquity".
They were not dreamers. They were guided by personal
recollection and real knowledge, not by what the creators of
"antiquity," who were in no way satisfied with the Ciriacus catalog,
wanted to find in Athens to write about, later.
As sad as it is to part with the usual ideas absorbed while still
in school about Ancient Greece, one needs to recognize that it is
only a reflection of medieval Greece. Not always precise, often
even distorted, but in any case - a reflection.

II is modern view of Acropolis f,om above. "Antique" buildings. which were left to restorers,
were lesser part of the complex of buildings, which located on the top of a rock in the
Middle Ages. "Antique view" was buill up.

94
FROM ROMULUS
TO THE MIDDLE AGES CHAPTER FIVE

The history of Rome occupies a dominant position in the

traditional historiography. In essence, the actual history of "Rome"
is the history of Europe, inasmuch as all tribes and peoples who
were living there in the past were connected, one way or another,
with the Roman Byzantine Empire: they were included in it, fought
with it, entered into alliances and so all. Therefore, every line in
this was of great significance to the countries which arose from the
ruins of the Empire in the Middle Ages. At that time, situations
were developing steadily which had to do with the succession of
power within the states or with the capture of land which the
states wanted to add to their own possessions. In each case the
Question inevitably arose: but on what basis?
This in itself is another reason why in all the leading European
countries, with such energy, on such a grand scale and with such
inventiveness fabricated documents, letters and compositions of
"ancient" authors in the Middle Ages about the glorious history of
the "Roman Empire" and about the connections with it of this or
that royal dynasty which, supposedly, was the rightful heir of the
Roman emperors.
This process started in the 14th century and continued into
the 16-17th centuries. The 18th century, which is notable for its
accumulation of materials and the start of scientific and critical
work on sources (Giambattista Vico, Charles Montesquieu~ Johann
Winklemann, Gotthold Lessing and others) marks a turning point
in the study of antiquity.
So thinks the traditional historiography. And it is right. [n
particular, in these centuries the adherents of Scaliger-Petavius
concluded the manufacture of "sources". They deposited these, in
accordance with the theory of "historic cycles", at various points
in the distant past. And thus the 19th century witnessed, as a
result, the birth of "true historical science".
In the 19th century, the German science of "antiquity" shows

95
up first in Europe. Germany was becoming the recognized center
of worldwide antiquities study and occupied this place for the whole
century. German science is represented by a whole galaxy of
scientists: these are the founders of the scientifically critical
historiography of ancient Rome: Barthold Georg Niebuhr (1776-
1830, Wilhelm Drumann and Albert Schwegler (the works of whom
became the immediate forerunner of Theodor Mommsen's "Roman
History"), the founder of the study of history of Hellenism Johann
Gustav Droysen (1808-1884), the historian of Greek culture E. Kurzius,
and also specialists OIl Rome W. lnje (1868-1890), Karl Wilhelm
Nitzsch (1818-1888) and others. At the end of the 19th century
such specialists as Eduard Meyer (t855-1930), Ulrich von
Wilamowitz-Mollendorff (1848-1931), Georg Busolt (1850-1920),
Karl Julius Beloch (1854-1929) and many others appear.
Theodor Mommsen was one of the central figures in the
background of German science. He expended much energy and
many years to "writing of a brilliant, highly artistic, broad-scale
deeply politicized historic composition which is 'The Roman
History' (Romische Geschichte)". Such is the evaluation of the
modern historiography. The combination of high-level scientific
and artistic data makes Mommsen's work a unique literary product,
the historians note. It is notable that in 1902, "The Roman History"
was awarded the Nobel Prize for Literature.
In their works, both Theodor Mommsen and all the remaining
antiquities authorities relied, naturally, on the sources which were
considered authentic. The main ones were the compositions of
Livy, Plutarch, Herodotus and other "ancient" authors. What kind
of a picture was painted by them?
Let us recall briefly some landmarks of Rome's traditional
history, using "World History" by Oscar Eger (2000.)
Everyone knows that at first a rule of kings was established in
Rome, there were seven of them and the first was the legendary
Romulus. Of the she-wolf which suckled him and Remus and
conferred a special monument in the "eternal city", any educated
person of course knows. But not everyone knows that the world
"Rome" means merely "fortress". And it has no relationship to
Romulus and Remus. And Romans were called at first not the
residents of a capita.l, but the people who live in a fortress. In any
fortress!
The famous "Salic Law", an extremely ancient document in

96
which is laid out the basis of Germanic law, is evidence of this.
As the commentator writes, in it "except for the bad, Barbarian
Latin language and counting in Roman solidi and denarii, in essence,
the Roman influence almost is not felt. The ancient Germanic
law appears before us, directly reminiscent in some parts of the
features of a way of life and dispositions, which existed in the
ancient Germans as early as several hundred years before their
intrusion into the Roman Empire".
So, in the "Salic Law" the notion of "Romans" doesn't in the
least mean "citizens of the Roman Empire". "Roman" means one of
the classes of a Barbarian community. In the document it states:
"§ t. If anyone have assaulted and plundered a freeman, and
it be proved on h.im, he shall be sentenced to 2,500 denars, which
make 63 shillings.
§ 2. If a Roman have plundered a Salian Frank, the above law
shall be ordered.
§ 3. But if a Frank have plundered a Roman, he shall be
sentenced to 35 shi Ilings".
As we see, a robbed Roman is not valued very highly. Another
thing, if a Roman is honored to be a royal dinner companion.
Here the stakes are much higher:
"§ 5. If anyone have slain a Roman who eats in the killg's
palace, and it have been proved on him, he shall be sentenced to
12,000 denars, which make 300 shillings.
§ 6. But if the Roman shall not have been a landed proprietor
and table companion of the king, he who killed him shall be
sentenced to 4,000 denars, which make 100 shillings".
So, who are such Romans? Townspeople who live within the
city's wall, who are attached to the city. But who have a chance to
have land. They are fully respected and can eat with the king, and
perhaps, even have supper, too. What rclation does this have to the
"Eternal City"? None.
The "universal history" further recounts that the Roman
Republic existed for almost 500 years after the kings. Why one
form of government replaced another and what the objective
reasons for the fundamental change of the social order were, the
history textbooks do not explain. From the time of the late Middle
Ages until the 21st century. all political cataclysms have such
reasons. But here in antiquity, in the opinion of the historians,
states were able just to become at first monarchies, and then republics

97
and then tyrannies and then something else. It all depended on
what the senate of that very Roman Republic was like or what
kind of ambitions one or the other lucky military commander had.
It says this about the famous Gaius Julius Caesar:
Gaius Julius Caesar was the first person in the Rome which
was becoming an empire who was able during a civil war to win a
political victory over his enemies. He undertook grandiose
construction, erected the Forum, the Temple of Venus, and he
gradually prepared the people of Rome for his future coronation.
However, Caesar was unlucky: in March 44 B.C. he was
murdered during a meeting of the senate. He was able only to say
the famous: "Et tu, Brute?" Instead his nephew Octavian had
better luck. The latter laid the foundations of a new state· of a
principate. The new form of rule implied an absolute monarchial
power.
Supposedly the great poets Horace and Virgil and the historian
Livy created their works in the limes of Octavian Augustus.
Afterwards, quite a number of different emperors ruled. In 49
years, 70 rulers were placed on the throne. The service of the emperor
Constantine is noted especially: he supposedly in 313 published
the Edict of Milan, which offiCially recognized the Christian
church. Having been Baptized, Constantine becomes the first
Christian ruler of Rome. And there on the location of the city of
Byzantium, he founded Constantinople, the state's new capital.
Theodosius I became the last emperor of a united Roman Empire.
He died in 395, leaving after him two sons who divided the great
empire between themselves into the Western and the Eastern.
The history of Rome does not end here. There was one more
Roman Empire, but Holy, and not so long ago, in the Middle Ages.
It was founded in 962 by the Saxon king, Otto 1 by means of the
capture of Northern and Central Italy. In the lo-13th centuries
Germany, a large part of Italy, and the kingdom of Burgundy were
included in the empire, and Bohemia was a vassal dependency. In
the subsequent centuries, the title of emperor ever more lost power
and changed into an honorary title, but the" Holy Roman Empire"
is an ephemeral state formation, the formal and factual territories
of which declined steadily. In 1806, the last emperor, Francis II,
renounced his title and the empire formally ceased to exist.
This is the backbone of Roman history, if one does not pay
attention to the prominent literary merits of the products both of

98
Theodor Mommsen and other antiquity authorities. We are talking
with the least irony possible about literary interest, since these
historians could only follow the traditions of all who had written
about Rome for some time. No one was able to manage without the
literary element, that is the purely artistic techniques, since there
are too many temporal lapses, contradictions, dates that don't
interface, and simply nonsense contained in the sources with which
they worked. In order to overcome or to avoid them, a great deal
of a writer's talent was needed.
We shall explain why these lapses, non-interfaces and
contradictions arose. Many people in many countries labored
over the creation of compositions of "antiquity". And, what is
very important, over the course of several centuries. There was no
coordinating center, and there could not be. Often "ancient"
compositions appeared in answer to a momentary political request,
and they were different in various countries and in various
epochs. Each of the authors pursued his own goals, not worrying
about whether what was written by them already had been
recognized by their colleagues.
Therefore, they were at a loss with the conscientious research of
the 19th century of the Theodor Mommsen type when they sincerely
and honestly tried to gain an understanding of the history of
"ancient" Rome. Since it was not within their conceptual means to
go beyond the framework of the Scaligerian chronology, they
endeavored to at least bring some measure of order to the
conglomeration of facts and supposedly ancient reports which
represented a "study of antiquities." By the way, they are trying
still. And, when literary talent already is insufficient, when the
faults of the "primary sources" are too obvious, they subject them to
destructive criticism.
For us, this criticism is one more convincing proof of the full
inconsistency of the traditional "ancient" history of the real history
of peoples.
We already have quoted Theodor Mommsen's opinjon about
the nonsense in the tales of the various activities of "ancient" Rome.
We shall add several more quotations:
"The lie in the numerical data was driven from Valerius Antias
systematically all the way into the modern historical period ...
Alexander Polyhistor set the example how to organize the missing
500 years from the fall of Troy to the rise of Rome in the chronological

99
connection ... and fill the interval with one of those vacuous lists
of kings who, unfortunately, were in sllch demand by the Egyptian
and Greek chroniclers; judging by all the data. In particular he
summoned into the world the Kings Aventinus and Tiberinus
and the Alban family of Silvius whom the progeny subsequently
supplied with their own names, which were determined by periods
of reign and, for greater clarity, even with portraits".
One can call the characterization of Polyhistor, the Egyptian
and Greek chroniclers, and at the same time even the progeny
under which Theodor Mommsen had in mh]d his own predecessors
and colleagues in the profession "scathing". It is too bad that
Theodor Mommsen did not guess that such a method of compiling
history was defining their own method. There was no other!
The historian N. Radzig complains about the difficulty of the
Roman chronology-base for the chronology overall:
"The thing is that the Roman chronicles have not reached us,
and therefore, we are supposed to make all our assumptions on the
basis of Roman historians and annalists. But even here ... we
confront great difficulties, from which the main one is the fact that
we even hold the annalists in an extremely poor light.
There is one more example of criticism of the "primary sources"
in the works of the most traditional historians.
Eduard Bickerman: "Inasmuch as there are full lists of Roman
consuls for 1,050 years ... then it may be easy to determine the
Julian date for each of them under the condition that the ancient
dates are reliable". The stipulation "under the condition" is
significant. The author is not completely certain of the reliability
of the ancient dates, inasmuch as they rely on the date of the
"founding of Rome". And it is unknown. Various authors name
various dates with a variation, as already has been mentioned, of
500 years! And this causes a variation throughout the consul list
and, consequently, a similar variation of all Roman history that is
organized according to this list.
It is thought that in the Roman fasti was observed
chronologically an annual (that is, through the years) record of all
officials of ancient Rome. The Russian historian G. Martynov
asks rhetorically:
"But how then does one reconcile with thjs the permanent
disagreements such as we meet in Livy at every step of the way in
the names of the consuls, and what is more, their frequent absence
and, in general, the complete arbitrariness of the choice of the names?
100
 ... The fasti are dotted with irregularities which, at times,
make them impossible to grasp. Livy already had recognized the
unsteadiness of this main foundation of his own chronology ...
One must recognize that neither Diodor nor Livy have the right
chronology ... We are not able to trust the linen books, relying on
which Licinius Macer and Tlibero give completely contradictory
directions. The most, apparently, trustwortllY documents, and
those, with a more careful inspection, turn out to be spurious·
forged much later".
The historians make mention of Livy both with a kind and
unkind word rather often.
He is an "ancient chronicler," the author of the book "A History
of Rome from its Foundation". More precisely, of books, inasmuch
as Livy wrote supposedly 142 books, but only 3S have been
preserved. That too is a lot, especially when olle considers that
Livy's works became well known only in the 15th century.
"Livy (59 B.C.· 17 A.D.) belongs to that brilliant galaxy of
writers and poets, thinker and historians, to whom it is acceptable
to ascribe the so called golden age of ancient Roman literature.
Livy was a younger contemporary of Cicero, Sallust and Virgil,
and the older of Ovid and Propertius, and almost of the same age
as Horace and Tibillus... his worldwide fame is based on a single
composition which has been preserved in a form far from complete,
and which by tradition is accepted as "A History of Rome from
its Foundation".
The literary merits of the composition (again literary!) are
noted especially:
"... in the spiritual possession of every cultured European are
bright images created by Livy of the people of that epoch - Brutus,
Hannibal, Cato the Elder, Fabius Maximus, and the scenes filled
with the profound drama of Lucretia's suicide, the route of the
Romans at the Caudine Forks and so on stagger the imagination.
"It is impossible for one to imagine the European cultural
tradition too without memorable speeches· of the Tribune Canuleius
to the people, of the consul Flamininus to the Hellenes, of the
military leader Scipio to the legions and of many, many others".
And the literary level is indeed high. And this compels one
to think about the question, just what product and when as a
matter of fact did Livy create. Traditional historians define his
intention thus:
"Livy - to a greater extent than any other of the ancient
101
authors - is the creator of a majestic reading and ideal portrait of
ancient republican Rome, the motherland of civil and military
heroism, the embodiment of a perfect social structure, a citadel of
laws and truth. This portrait is found to be in blatant
contradiction to immediate historical reality: Rome lived by war
and for war, greedily capturing ever new riches, ever new cities
and countries; the power was concentrated in the hands of the
aristocracy, and the people in fact crowded out of the determination
of state affairs; the laws steadily and cynically were violated by
the rich and the strong".
Everything is correct except one thing: it wasn't "ancient"
Rome that lived by war and for war, but Livy's modern medieval
Europe! And he, a man of letters of the 15th century, created, using
the modern language, a utopian novel, haVing expressed in it his
own dreams of the best state structure, of brave and magnanimous
peoples and of a "golden" age in Europe's distant past. In those
times many wrote of Utopia and dreamed about the ideal society,
free of those abominations with which their life so abounded.
Many supposed that such a society had existed at some long-gone
time, and they determined that, if they could not return to it,
then at least they could take it as an example to emulate.
Livy wrote about this directly:
"... either a fond partiality for the task I have undertaken
deceives me, or there never was any state either greater, or more
moral, or richer in good examples, nor one into which luxury and
avarice made their entrance so late, and where poverty and frugality
were so much and so long hOllored. The less wealth therc was, the
less desire was there; of late, riches have introduced avarice and
excessive pleasures a longing for them - amid luxury and a passion
for ruining ourselves and destroying everything else.
In contrast to other Utopias, Livy used the realities around him
in the "History of Rome" so that it would be more convincing. This
allowed, in addition, the appearance of "historical cycles." It is very
convenient, inasmuch as when you usc it, it is complctely unnecessary
to know the names of all the consuls and to put them in order. It is
perhaps, as G. Martynov expresses it, to allow a "full arbitrariness".
Livy is not to blame for the fact that the followers of Scaliger
declared "History of Romc", as also Homer's poems, an ancient
historical document.
The facts indicate that Livy is from the 15th century, a
102
contemporary of the great Utopiast, Thomas Moore. For example,
in particular at this time lived the bistarian Tito Livia do Forli,
who compiled a biography of King Henry V, about which the
chroniclers testify. One can find other Livys, too. Such as Titus
Livius ("The Respectable Libyan"), Titus Livius di Padava, et al. It
is fitting to speak in detail about Livy since, as the historians
themselves confess, "he ... remains our chief source for the history
of republican Rome. The majority of facts which are reported by
Livy find direct or indirect confirmation in other sources and
can be considered fully reliable. Not one person ... who wishes to
see the history of Rome of the kings' epoch, and of the early and
middle republics, can manage without Livy's compositions".
And we shall not manage without him either. But this will
be in order to see what happened in medieval Europe beyond the
events of "ancient" Rome.
The adherents of the new chronology conclude that the
reinterpreted history of the Holy Roman Empire is reflected in the
history of the Roman Empires which are ascribed by the traditional
historiography to ancient times and antiquity. And what is more,
according to the laws of the repeating "historic cycles". Therefore,
the "ancient" Rames are designated as Empire II and lIT. (Gleb
Nosovskiy, Anatoly Fomenko "Russia and Rome", Volume 1).
There are almost innumerable parallels between these Rames.
Here are a few of them, which are taken from the three "Roman
Empires" .

I"...." .... , " • •

Ancient Rome
Livy places the "Tarquin Period' at the end of the
II
"King's Rome" and describes the Tarquin War
and the exile of the Tarquins from Rome. As we
already have said, this basically is the GothicWar
of the 13th century.
Medieval Rome
After this war, Livy describes "republican Rome"
In Italy. II is a copy of Italian Rome of the 14th
century, when elements of republican govern-
ment appeared there in the stale structure.

lucius Sulla, who received the official title
Restitulor Urbis "Restorer of the CiI( ruled in
antiquity (no one else had such a title in the
Empire 01 caesar.) Plutarch calls him emperor
of Rome. The senate proclaimed him dictator.
Sulla in fact established the Roman Empire (II)
after a period of anarchy and republic and be-
came the first emperorofthe Empire of Caesar.
lucius Aurellianus, who received the desig-
nation Restitulor Ofbis - "Reslorer of the World"
ruled the empire in the Middle Ages (no one else
in the Diodetian Empire had such a title.) The
senate proclaimed him emperor under pressure
of the troops. Aurellianus 'restored'the Roman
empire after sevefe anarchy. He became the
firsl emperorofthe Diodetian Empire.

103
After the death of SuUa in "andenr Rome, civil
war again flared up. Two brilliant military leaders
are promoted, Junius Brutus and Marcus Aemi-
lius lepidus. The troops of both military leaders
are crushed. The duration of the strife is nearty a
year.
After the death of Aurellianus, the stability of the
state authorities in the medieval empire is again
disrupted. Two new emperors are promoted Flo-
rian and Probus. Florian's troops are crushed.
The duration ofthe strife is nearly ayear.

I~fter the strife, Marius Quintus Sertorius comes The same thing happens in the Middle Ages:
to power. He ruled six years. He is murdered as Probus becomes emperor after the strife. He
a result of a conspiracy. ruled six years. He is murdered as a resu~ of a
soldier's mutiny.

Two years of severe strife paralyzed ancient After Probus there also are two years of severe
Rome. The famous revah of Spartacus took strife. And two military leaders also are selected,
place. The most brilliant figures of those years true, they are named dilferently:Aurelius Carinus
are Pompeius and Crassus. af'ld Numerianus.

After the strife in 70 B.C, Gnaeus Pompeius
Magnus Triumphator, organizer of the first mum·
virate, becomes emperor. They call the time of
his rule the epoch of the 'Prinicpat of Pompey".
He was declared agod even while alive. He ruled
21 years. Then the senate deprived him of all
powe'.
The very same history is repeated in the Middle
Ages, but only with Diodelian, the organizer of
the first Tetrarchy. They call the time of his rule
the 'Epoch of the Dominatus' He was declared
divine even while alive. He ruled 21 years. Then
he abdicated power.

After the dethronement of Pompeius strife
lasted 4 years. Julius Caesar oomes to power.
He rulesoneyear. He adopts and raises 19-year-
old Octavian who becomes the lamousAugustus
and will be ranked among the demigods.
After the abdication of Dioclelian there is four
years of strife. Conslantius I ChlONS has power.
He rules one year. He raises to the throne his 20-
year old son Constantine who becomes the
famous Augustus and will be ranked among the
demigods...

And so page after page and period after period arc repeated
10 the history of the "Roman Empires".
A question might arise: If the parallelism is so obvious, then
where have the historians in later times been looking? It would be
completely in error to regard them as people who fail to observe
elementary scientific honesty. On the contrary, the honesty and
decency of many of them is above suspicion.
The answer has to do with the fact that this parallelism
appeared with such clarity only in our own time, when numerous
historical works were analyzed with the help of mathematics. In
order to uncover it, the most complex mathematic calculations
were necessary, along with the use of the newest methods and
computer technology. Glcb Nosovskiy and Anatoly Fomenko, from
the works of wbom many other examples also have been taken by
104
us, have carried out such work.
The unprocessed "ancient" material is full of eloquent details,
bright and unique: the authors were talented men of letters, and
these details create a convinving impression of unique events.
MathematicJans have coded hundreds of chronicles and compiled
computer programs over a number of years. Using these, they have
uncovered the salient patterns in the texts and weeded-out the
secondary data. Only when this was done did the clear parallels
and repetitions in the events of the different epochs appear before
us.
According to the calculations of the mathematicians, 74 percent
of Livy's text, which relates to the Tarquin War, "has turned out
to be settled by the parallelism discovered".
That is, almost alt Livy's tale is a phantom reflection of medieval
events.
The calculations show that Italian Rome was founded as a
capital only at the end of the 14 th century; that the Gothic-Tarquirtian
War occurred within the Byzantine Empire in the 131h century and
that its epicenter was New Rome. Then, and only then, when one
part of Byzantine h1stol)' was shifted (on paper) to Italy, the Gothic-
Tarquinian War was shifted, simultaneously, to Italian Rome.
Among the fundamental works on the history of Rome arc also
numbered the products of the "ancient" writer (supposedly 46-119
A.D.) Plutarch, no less famous than Livy. His "Comparative
Biographies", in the opinion of the traditional historians, are fonts
of knowledge of antiquity and of ancient Rome, inasmuch as he
supposedly used sources now inaccessible to science for the
compilation of the biographies of famous Greeks and Romans.
("Ancient Writers," St. Petersburg, 1999).
But what did Plutarch himself write about himself and about
the purpose of his creation? He wanted to create a "model of the
mutual respect" between Greeks and Romans and therefore, brought
together biographies of the famous men of the two countries. His
goal was to compel tbe reader to admire the heroic deeds of these
heroes, and to emulate them. That is, he pursued a particularly
educational goal.
It is not without reason that Plutarch was, above all, considered
a pedagogue. Therefore, he didn't even mention that a number of
historic facts could not be reconciled with each other, be made

105
good use of anecdotes, and did not hesitate to change events
wherever and however he wanted. He created what we now call a
best-seller, not worrying about the precision of the historic dates
and the correspondence of his tale with reality. That is, he acted
as any normal writer does, being more concerned with his popularity
among his readers than with his reputation among historians.
Nonetheless, textbooks were written on the history of Ancient
Greece and Rome using "Comparative Biographies.• True, this was
after the 16th century. Up to that century, nothing whatsoever
was known about Plutarch! The collection "Ancient Writers"
reports on this sparingly and evasively:
"Before the end of antiquity Plutarch enjoyed the loud praise
as the greatest of educ.ators and philosophers, even in Byzantium.
Those of Plutarch's compositions which were found in the
Renaissance (15th century) and have been translated into Latin,
have once again become a foundation" ... Again - in the 15th
century! Once again, the compositions of another ancient "great"
are found, as it were, completely by accident. But from where then
is it known that 1,500 years ago he was considered the greatest?
Such contemporary historians exemplify the expression: "He
lies like Plutarch!" But with one modification: Plutarch, a 15lh
century writer, while composing "Comparative Biographies", did
not think about history. And if the traditional historiography
nonetheless uses it as an .ancient. primary source, then it is no
longer the author's problem and he does not need to reproach
himself for having told lies. Studying "antiquity" according to
Plutarch is about on a par with studying the Middle Ages according
to the historical novels of Walter Scott.
Among the "ancient" authors on which the traditional
historiography relies, Josephus Flavius also is of importance.
It is reported that JOSEPHUS FLAVlUS was born around
37 A.D., and died around 100 A.D.; that he was a Jewish historian
and a military leader. Josephus came from a noble family of priests,
at the age of 19 joining the Pharisees and becoming an influential
person in Judea. He was in Rome around 64 A.D., seeking to
obtain from Nero the freedom of several noble Jews. The power and
cultural superiority of the Romans made an enormous impression 011
Josephus. On returning to Jerusalem he discovered that the Jews
were preparing to rebel against Roman rule. Although he lacked

106
enthusiasm for this, he was obliged to join them. Josephus was
charged with the defense of Galilee, that is, the northern part of
Palestine. However, his efforts met with little success and, having
withstood a 47-day siege in the city of Jotapata, he was captured in
67 A.D. by the future emperor Vespasian. In order to save his own
life and hoping to help his compatriots after their inevitable defeat,
Josephus offered his services to Vespasian; before the end of the war
he had become a translator for him and Titus, and also a mediator
between the Romans and the Jews. After the fall of Jerusalem in 70
A. D. Josephus was sent to Rome, where he received Roman
citizenship and a pension.
Josephus is well known by those works that came down to us
in the Greek language - "The Wars of the Judaeans" (about the
rebellion of 66-70) and "The Antiquities of the Judaeans", in which
Biblical history from the world's creation until the Judean war is
summarized.
Well, modern historians write about him so intimately and
capaciously. We might note that his works are not in Aramaic (the
language of "ancient" Israel). They supposedly disappeared and
became known only in the Middle Ages in a translation into Greek.
In which connection, no one knows who translated them and when.
Yes, Flavius wrote about the Judean war and about Rome.
But when? And about which Rome ? Researchers are unanimous
that Flavius was a talented man of letters. But on ly that. In the
"Antiquities of the Judaeans", he makes an expanded synopsis of
the Bible (as it was then, or as he understood it), functioning as its
popularizer. To enquire as to when the "Antiquities" were written
does not make practical sense.
In the Judean war itself there are places that testify to the fact
that this composition was created after the voyages of the Spanish
admiral and viceroy of "India", Christopher Columbus. That is, in
the 16th century!
We read very carefully in the text of Agri ppa's fiery appeal to
the residents of Jerusalem who had gathered on the square in
front of the Hasmonean palace: "The power of the Romans is
invincible in all parts of the habitable earth. Rather they seek for
somewhat still beyond that; for all Euphrates is not a sufficient
boundary for them on the east side, nor the Danube on the north;
and for their southern limit, Libya hath been searched over by

107
 them, as is Cadiz their limit on the west; nay, indeed, they have
sought for a !lew world beyond the ocean, and have carried their
arms as far riches that were never kJl0Wn before". ("The Wars of
the Judaeans", Book II, 16: 4).
"New world". An expression that came into general use
somewhat later than the time of Columbus. As is known, the Spanish
admiral was firmly convinced that he had opened a new route to
India. and even to Asia as a whole. Only subsequently did it
become clear that it was in no way Asia. Just when did the Romans
"carry their arms beyond the ocean"?
No one yet has decided to ascribe the discovery of America to
the "ancient" Romans. Therefore, it remains only to establish that
the author of "The Wars of the Judaeans" lived not I,500 years
before Columbus, but several dozen years after him. It could hardly
have been otherwise.
And there are other "ancient" personalities whose names are
well known to any educated person. We shall name a few of them.
Cicero. As with all ancient authors, he became will known
to researchers only in the so-called Renaissance. The copies of
the 9-10th centuries are considered the most ancient copies of
Cicero's "incomplete texts;" the original of the incomplete text, as
might be expected, "was lost long ago." In the 14-15th centuries,
interest in Cicero grows to such an extent "that near 1420 Milan
professor Gasparino da Barzizza... undertook a risky job: to fill
in the gaps of the "incomplete text" with his own additions for
the sake of coherency.
But he did not have to comple his work, since just in time a
miracle happened: In the out-of-the-way town of Lodi is found a
discarded manuscri pt with the full texts of all of Cicero's rhetorical
productions! Barzizza and his students pounce on the Ilew discovery,
deci pher with difficulty its ancient (very likely, 13th centuI)') scri pt
and produce, finally, a readable copy. Copies are made from this and,
working together they compile a "complete text".
Then something irreparable happens, as the reader has probably
already guessed: the original manuscri pt of this text, the Lodi
manuscri pt, is abandoned; no one wants to trouble himself with
the difficulties it presents. So they send it back to Lodi, and there
it disappears without a trace: after 1428, nothing is known about
its fate. European scholars mourn this "loss for our time" to this

108
day. (Cicero. "Three Treatises on Oratory". 1972).
We would mourn too if this pattern of "discovery and loss"
were not typical of what is alleged to have happened to the originals
of all forgeries made at that time.
Aristotle. His most ancient biography is dated to 1300. This
manuscri pt is, as lamented in Commentaries on it, "falling apart
more and more, and individual places which one was able to read
in the 19th century, now are being read with great difficulty".
(Such, we note, is the fate practically of all manuscri pts: they decay
over the centuries, and this biography, if the dating of it is correct,
is among the oldest which survive). It is considered that Aristotle's
philosophy was forgotten, becoming once again well known, to
Latin speakers, only approximately from 1230.
Euclid's "Principles". The most ancient of the known copies
dates to 888; the rest to the 10- 13th centuries.
Archimedes. The basis of all modern publications is the lost
manuscri pt of the 15th century and the Constantinople palimpsest
which was found only in 1907. It is considered that manuscript
works of Archimedes came to Europe for the first time after 1204.
The first translation is dated 1269 (however, its full text is found
only in 1884 ). The first printing is in 1503, the first Greek edition
is in 1544, after which the works of Archimedes are in everyday
scientific use.
The Suetonius book, "Lives of the Twelve Caesars" also is
available only in very late copies, and all of them trace back to "a
single ancient manuscript," which was found supposedly at the
disposal of Einhard (nearly 818 A.D.) He wrote "The Life of
Charles", industriously reproducing - as it is considered today ~
the "Suetonian biographical schemes". This is the so-called Fulda
ffiallllscri pt; the first copies from it have not come down to us; a
9th century text is the oldest surviving copy of it, but this appeared
only in the 16th century. The remaining copies are dated oat
earlier than the 11th century.
Fragments of the Suetonius book "On Famous People" appeared
very late indeed: Poggio Bracciolini discovered the so-called
Hersfeld manuscript in 1425. This was not preserved, but nearly
20 copies from it survive which were made in Italy in the 15th
century. It also is dated to the 9th century.
It is dated ... But by whom, when and on which princi pies?

109
And even Bracciolini is known today, as we have already pointed.
out, for his forgeries. Not at all for discoveries.
in 1497, Vitruvius' book "On Architecture" was discovered.
[n the astronomical section of the book the periods of the heliocentric
orbits of the planets are shown with unbelievable precision. It
turns out that the architect Vitruvius, who lived, as the medieval
chroniclers have determined, supposedly in the t-2nd centuries
A.D., knew these numbers better than the astronomer Copernicus.
Moreover, in Saturn's period of rcvolution, hc erred only by a
fraction of 0.‫סס‬OO7 of the modern knowledge of this period, for
Mars the error is only 0.006 and for Jupiter - 0.003.
The Vitruvius book is similar in many ways to the books of the
well known 15th century humanist Alberti (1414-1472). Alberti is
famous as a great architect; but Vitruvius, as it should be from his
work, is also an architect. Alberti is the author of a well·known
architectural theory which is surprisingly simiJar to the theory set
forth in the work of Vitruvius. Alberti wrote a fundamental work
under the name of "Ten Books on Architecture", which included not
only his theory of architecture, but also information on mathematics,
optics and mechanics; strangely enough, Vitruvius' book is also
called "Ten Books on Architecture", and its contents are the same.
Right now it is considered that Vitruvius was, for Alberti, "an example
for imitation in the compilation of his own treatise", and that Alberti's
work on the whole is constrained "to ancient tones".
So, lhe leading architect of the era fills the cities of Italy with
ancient structures which now are considered as "imitations of
antiquity", and he writes a book "in the ancient stylc".
Let's just see how many structures are ancient.

110
VISIBLE FEATURES
OF THE MIDDLE AGES CHAPTER SIX

With the preceding in mind. let us consider the architectural

monuments of Rome.
Let us suppose that, although it is difficult to trust the
traditional historians, still, it is impossible that in Italian Rome
there are no monuments which are the tangible evidence of the
Eternal City's glorious past. Let us consider what it is, then, that
the Roman guides show the millions of tourists who arrive from all
over the world?
The answer is simple: Medieval ruins.
Here is the evidence. The first two lists of Rome's monuments
were compiled only in the 12th and 13th centuries A.D. Very
curious lists! No historian will agree with them. Judge for yourself.
According to the lists. the basilica of Constantine is named the
temple of Romulus. The church of Saint Sergius at the same time
was dedicated also ... to Saint Bacchus. Among the medieval
Roman saints are met St. Achilles, St. Quirin, St. Dyonisius, St.
Hi ppolytus, St. Hermes... There is no reason to doubt the
documcntary evidence itself, thcreforc, thc conclusion immediately
offers itself: such saints really were known in the Middle Ages.
Only when thcy became heroes of "ancicnt" poems and chronicles,
the definition "saint" underwcnt a transformation.
Startling "crrors" are cncountered in the medicval chronicles
from the point of view of thc modern historiography. For example,
Ricobald maintains that the famous (ancient) equestrian statue of
Marcus Aurelius was cast and dclivered by order of Pope Clement
III, at thc end of the 10th century. How can the traditional
historiography agree with this?
"Ricohald ... has erred. Was any similar work in bronze thcn
ablc to be executed given the low level at which art stood then in
Romc?" the historians ask, guessing that in "ancient" Rome art
stood at an immeasurably higher level - only to disappear
somewhere but appear again, they assure us, during the Renaissance.
1I t
 We recall Francesco Petrarch, the great poet of the 14th century.
I-Ie was one of the first and mo~t. devoted propagandists of the
"ancient" authors and also had a hand in the appearance of Rome's
"ancient" monuments. He traveled a lot, studied the monuments of
old, and examined the monastic libraries. Thus, in 1336, he visited
Italian Rome for the first time, having a precise notion of what
should be there. And he derived this.notion, which is very important,
from books. As a result. he writes t.o one of his friends and colleagues,
expressing sincere indignation at what he saw:
Where are the thermae of Dioclctian and Caracalla ? Where is
Marius' cimbrium, the septizonium and baths of Severus? Where are
the forum of Augustus and the Temple of Mars the Avenger? Where
are the relics of Jupiter the Thunderer at the Capitoline and of Apollo
on the Palatine? Where is the portico of Apollo, the basilica of Gaius
and Lucius, the portico of Livy and the theatre of Marcellus? Where
here did Marcius Phili ppus build t.he temple of Hercules and the
Muses and Lucius Cornificius of Diana? Where is the Atrium Libcltatis
of Asinius Pollio? Where are the countless works of Agri ppa, of which
only the Pantheon has been preservt,-'d? Where <Ire the magnificent
palaces of the emperors? You find all of these in books, but when you
look for them in the city, it tUnlS out that they have disappeared or
that only pitiful traces of them are left. And this is not in the 2tst,
but in the 14th century! We shall repeat the question: just what is it,
then, that the Roman guides show to tourists today?
There wcre not any "ancient" remains in Italian Rome. But
Petrarch was not able to imaginc lhe city without them. He
began, therefore, to "assign" thesc to locations here and there.
Thus, he "found" the Coliseum. True, the "ancient" Coliseum had
been a theatre, so he needed to clarify that the Coliseum of his
time had since become, in the mean time. for some reason, a castle-
a fortress of one of the mcdicval feudal clans. That same fate befell,
in the opinion of the poet, the ancient mausoleum of Adrianus, the
theatre of Marcellus, the arch of Septirnius Scverus and so on. All
of them had subsequently been turned into medieval structures.
In our view, Anatoly Fomcnko, who thinks that construction
in Italian Rome of the buildings and structures which are today
called "ancient" was begun only in the 14th century A.D., is
profoundly correct. They were built by analogy, with the architecture
of New Rome-Constantinople, creating the capital of the new empire
in the process. Ergo, "antiqUity".

112
 Traditional historians sec Petrarch's service in the fact that he
"began to create Rome's authentic history". (J. Parandovsky). [n
particular, he tried to reconcile the actual topography of Rome with
the accounts of "ancient Rome" which had been created by people
who had never been there. Locations were required for the features
people read about in these books. His most important contribution,
then, was his assignment of "ancient Roman" Dames to various
existing places. Since be did this, historians have imagined that it
was "known" with ccrtainty where these were located.
Petrarch brought order,as well,to the collection of manuscripts
and to the commentaries made on them. He wrote to friends: "If I
am dear to you, do this: find people who are educated and worthy
of trust, and let them search all through Tuscany - rummage through
the closets of learned men, both religious and secular". Why (by
the way) Tuscany? Because there still wasn't anything in Rome.
But Florence, in Tuscany, was the political center of Italy.
In answer to Petrarch's request, manuscri pts flowed to him.
If he asked for texts of Cicero's speeches, these were found, after
some time, without fail. He himself found Cicero's letters in the
Cathedral library in Verona. No one had previously known of
their existence, and even Petrarch himself sought to know why
not the original, but only a copy existed. But we will not find
fault with such details. Since the chronologists composed history,
Petrarch and his friends were the resurrectors of "ancient"
literature. Such was the time.
The poet acknowledged in a letter to Livy (yes, that same
Uvy who lived supposedly at the start of the Dew era) that the age
pictured by a colleague seemed SO beautiful to him that he longingly
Doted: "In delightful dreams I imagine myself living among these
great people, and not among the thieves and bandits who in any
event surround me".
One more attempt to appeal to his contemporaries to follow
the example of the people of the "golden age" of antiquity. Contrived,
but so attractive, these "delightful dreams of the past '" Petrarch
wrote: "'n my composition is contained only that which relates
to virtues and vices since, if I am not mistaken, the true mission of
a historian consists of showing his readers the examples they should
follow and what they need to avoid".
He is also well aware of the proper way to do this: it is
necessary that the "new product bear a resemblance to the archetype,

t t3
but that it not be identical". A true master in the creation of
"ancient" literature.
Petrarch also had notably practical goals in his own study
and propaganda of "antiquity". When, among other instances, he
proved that several letters of Caesar and Nero were spurious, he by
no means did so for the sake of truth. The forged letters of the
"ancient emperors" in the middle of the 14th century had "a political
significance of no small account, since the claims of the empire to
Austria were substantiated by the authority of these epistles". (R.
Khlodovsky). Petrarch maintained that the privileges granted by
Caesar and Nero to the Austrian duke were forged. Tremendous
political issues. were resolved with the aid of "antiquity"!
Traditional history misses this completely. It does not admit
either the context or the consequence of Petrarch's unmasking in
Europe. You see, if one acknowledge these, then it is recognized by
implication that not only the poet, but also the kings and grand
dukes well knew that ancient Rome itself had been created quite
recently. Did the emperors of "ancient" Rome bestow privileges
on a medieval Austrian duke? From the point of view of the
Scaligerian chronology this is absolute nonsense.
The historian E. Prister sneers: "What was there to lock horns
over? The Roman Empire fell in the 6th century A.D., and the
Holy Roman Empire arose only in the 10th century... It is even
more absurd to maintain that Caesar or Nero were able to give any
kind of "privileges" to an Austrian ducal house that started to rule
only in 1273 - twelve centuries after them!"
He concludes that this twelve-century break had always existed,
and that everyone knew it as well as they know it today. Therefore,
Petrarch's disagreement with his opponents could have been no
more than a game:
"All interested people understood well that they were evident
and shameless forgeries, but nonetheless they 'politely' closed their
eyes to this circumstance".
Irony is a good thing, but it is doubtful at least that, in such
questions as the capture of foreign territories, the strong of this
world "politely" closed their eyes to the forgeries. It was a question
of life and death - not games and politeness. The medieval rulers
knew beyond doubt that the emperors of the "previous" Rome had
lived only one or two generations before them. And they took
everything involved seriously.
114
 Medieval society generally adopted the same attitude toward
"antiquity" as it did to its own recent past and present. That
same German historian Ferdinand Gregorovius who created, along
with a fundamental work on the history of Athens, a six-volume
study of medieval Rome, attests to this. Its value consists most of
all in the huge quantity of documents of that time it contains.
These provide us with an authentic picture of life in that time.
Ferdinand Gregorovius, true, thinks (as a traditional historian
must) that centuries lie between "ancient" Rome and the Middle
Ages: "Since that time, as the state of the Goths declined (in the
6th century A.OJ, the ancient regime of Italy and Rome reached
complete destruction. Its laws, monuments and even historical
memories - everything was consigned to oblivion.
The result is striking: Rome was turned into an especially
religious city. It became a true monastery. This mysterious
conversion of "ancient secular Rome" (recall the iron legions, the
unbending heroes) into the "medieval religious" was declared in
the Scaliger history as "one of the greatest and most astonishing
metamorphoses in the history of mankind".
Between "antiquity" and the Middle Ages is a gap of 500 and
more years. Nothing is known about them. Ferdinand Gregorovius
writes: "Events of the subsequent years are unknown to us, since
the chroniclers of that time, terse and just as vague, as it itself, refer
only to the adversities".
The following is reported about events supposedly of the middle
of the 9th century A.D.: "A historian of Rome for this period is
supposed to be content with the annals of the Frankie chroniclers,
which give only extremely scanty reports, and the biographies of
the popes, which contain almost the only indkations of what kind
of structures were raised and what kind of donations were made.
Therefore, there is no hope for a historian to give a picture of the
civil life of the city at that time". And further: "In the papal
archives were maintained a multitude of church documents and
regesta" ... But they were lost without a trace in the 12th and
13th centuries! That same evil fate which destroyed all the other
originals continued to rage.
So thinks Ferdinand Gregorovius: they didn't disappear to
anywhere; they were simply transferred to "antiquity." And because
of this, in the words of the author, "a huge and indelible blank"
resulted in our information about that time. But inasmuch as the
115
Scaligerian chronology is sacrosanct for Gregorovius, he thinks
that the Roman monks are to blame for everything. They were so
apathetic about the history of their own city that nothing was
written for five centuries, so that the events that occurred in it
"have remained shrouded by an uttermost gloom for us".
Strange conversions happen all the time in these centuries,
striving as they are to become "ancient". For example, the ancient
Roman calendar with its Ides and Calends disappears to somewhere
for a thousand years. It ended supposedly in the 6~7th centuries
A.D. However, the authors of the 14lh century, unaware of this,
reckon time according to the Ides and Calends. Roman residents
bear "ancient" names, right up to the time of Socrates.
A discussion of the question of the existence of the senate and
the consulate in medieval Rome flares up many times in the
Scaligerian history. On the one hand, these famous political
institutions are recognized as integral features of an exclusively
"ancient" Rome. On the other hand, the chronicles that survived
from time to time report on the existence in medieval Rome of a
senate, of senators, of consuls, of tribunes and of praetors. These
are, obviously, "ancient" titles, names and responsibilities.
A definite split occurs even within traditional history itself
among specialists on Rome. Some think that all these institutions
- which are considered "ancient" continued to exist even into
4

the Middle Ages. Others, aJld in to this majority in particular

belonged Ferdinand Grcgorovius, were certain that medieval
Romans used all these "ancient terms" as it were, mechanically, not
ascribing to them any "former meaning", preserving them only as
"a pleasant memory" of the grandeur of their "ancient Rome".
Trying to explain this, Ferdinand Gregorovius turns to psychology,
inasmuch as the documents he has do not give any basis for his
conclusions: "They {medieval Romans> call upon themselves for
help from the graves of antiquity, haVing already become legendary;
these shadows of consuls, tribunes and senators, as it were, actually
hover in the Eternal City throughout the Middle Ages".
And they don't just hover! Emperor Otto III in the 10th century,
it turns out, tried to resurrect the long forgotten customs of the
Romans. In particular, he bore "titles, created in the manner of the
titles of the ancient Roman victors." And what is more, this strange
emperor introduced "the remains that were left intact from the Roman
Empire - ranks, clothing and ideas... The aspiration to ennoble the
116
barbarian epoch with similar memories was in general use.
In other words there was, as for the rest of Europe's sovereigns,
absolutely nothing for Otto III to do. Therefore, they were all
involved with a theatrical masquerade, wasting both time, energy
and no small amount of money on it. And over the course of
several centuries at that. This is hardly close to the truth.
A further consideration: in order to seriously re-create
"antiquity," one must know well its way of life, and for this it
follows that books are required - even if these have been composed
by the "creators" of history. However, it is known for certain that
in the 10th century, as it was in those that followed, one of the chief,
distinguishing features of society was universal illiteracy. Education
was concentrated mainly in the churches and monasteries. Not
only did the simple people not know how to read or write, but
similarly the elite of society as well at that time - the kings and
dukes. It was considered reprehensible and even offensive for a
knight to pour over books and to scratch with a qUill like the
beggarly street scribes who wrote letters to order for a song. From
whence djd the sovereigns come to know the details of the everyday
life of the ancients? In which universities did they study it?
There were no such universities. There was only everyday life,
everywhere consisting of supposedly "ancient" realities. Coming
across it too often in the documents of that epoch, Ferdinand
Gregorovius, a fine specialist, is obliged to propose explanations
more serious than the inclination of the sovereigns for masquerades.
He argues the "strangeness of social evolution" and "the law of
repetition in history". That is, the "historical cycles" through which,
we recall, mankind will orbit as the earth around the sun. Thus
one and the same event comes to be repeated, identical even down
to the tiniest details, terms and names.
Ferdinand Gregorovius honestly reports that Rome's history
is more or less assuredly traced from us not further back than the
It-13th centuries A.D. After "antiqUity, we will not meet the names
of Capitoline" for a long time; "it disappears from the pages of
history. True, in 'Graphia,' it said that the walls of Capitoline were
lined with glass and gold, but a descri ption of the temple is not
prOVided. Regarding the imperial forums, once full of grandeur, a
profound silence is maintained with the exception of the forum of
Trajan. The forum of Augustus wa..o;;; so cluttered with ruins and so
overgrown with trees that the people called it a magical garden".

tt7
 The reason for this "profound silence" can only be that the
imperial forums at that time still had not been built. Construction
on such a scale and of such significance could not have escaped
the attention of a chronicler, however apathetic.
Returning to Capitoline, Ferdinand Gregorovius writes: "For
more than 500 years the impenetrable gloom of night envelops this
place... Only because the legend of \Yhat the Capitoline had been
was preserved could it again take on historical significance and
once again concentrate in itself the political activity of the city, once
the spirit of civil independence was aroused. In the 11th century
the Capitoline already was the center of all the purely city affairs ...
This relic of the Roman Empire rose from the dead in the memories
of the Romans and animated meetings of the elite on its ruins...
Afterwards, during the time of Benzo,. Gregory VII and Gclasius II,
the Romans summoned everyone to that very Capitoline when the
roisterous elections of the prefects are at hand, when it is necessary
to get the agreement of the people on the election of Callistus II or it
is required to call the Romans to arms. It is possible that the city's
prefect had his quarters also at Capitoline, since a prefect who was
named by Henry IV... lived here in particular. Further, a trial also
took place in the palace which was located at Capitoline".
There are two key words in this passage: "the Ruins of
Capitoline". They mean that gatherings, meetings, elections, disputes,
the discussion of documents (and their preservation), the
pronouncement of responsible state decisions, the signing of official
papers and so forth, were completed on the heaps of the old overgrown
ruins, and not in specially built premises. Even the prefect lived at
the ruins and had his own tumbledown quarters here.
Ferdinand Grcgorovius maintains this, despite all the absurdity
of such a conclusion, since the Scaligerian chronology considers
the "ancient" Capitoline to have been destroyed in antiquity. He
cannot permit even the suspicion that the Capitoline was built in
the Middle Ages for these particular purposes, and destroyed
significantly later. But in the Rome of the 14-16th centuries, there
were "waves of destruction" enough.
Ferdinand Gregorovius continues: "Sitting on the toppled
columns or beneath the arches of the state archives, among the broken
statues and slabs with inscriptions, a Capitoline monk, a grasping
consul, and an ignorant senator were able at the sight of these ruins
to feel amazement and to be lost in thought about fate's fickleness".

118
 In which connection, the senators arrived not in some kind of
everyday clothing, but in tall mitres and brocaded cloaks. At the
same time, they "had really only a vague notion that here in particular
laws were once proclaimed by officials, and speeches delivered by
orators... There is no mockery worse than what Rome endured!. ..
Among the marble lumps grazed a flock of goats; from this, part of
the Capitoline received the name, 'Goat Hill' ... the Roman forum
similarly began to be called a 'pasture".
The picture, of course, is staggering: a flock of goats grazes
on the Capitoline ruins, and here too senators in brocaded cloaks,
sitting on the marble lumps decide the affairs of state. But you see,
Ferdinand Gregorovius needs to explain why part of the Capitoline
was called Goat Hill! It is simpler to propose that it had been
called "Goat" before the construction of Capitoline. But then it
has to be recognized that it still did not exist. But the traditional
historiography will not admit this. And here the historian paints
a tragicomic picture.
Even when there is a descri ption in the chronicles of a
Capitoline not yet completely destroyed, Ferdinand Gregorovius
does not believe it. And there is such a descri ption, and the
historian quotes it in the pages of his work. It describes the
Capitoline as the city's functioning political center, a place of
luxurious buildings and temples. There is not a word in it about
flocks of goats dolefully wandering among its splendors.
Citing all of thjs medieval text (one must give the historian's
scientific honesty its due), Ferdinand Gregorovius cannot avoid
the thought that all these wonders only appeared in the dreams of
a medieval witness. He considers it a tale of long-past Rome.
And so he writes: In the descri ption of Capitoline that the
Mirabilia give, we see it as though in the fading light of day ...
Even for these legendary books it already is the past and a mystery".
One of these books - "Graphia", written after the 10th century,
reports that the walls of Capitoline were lined with glass and
gold! Of course, the historian does not believe it.
But with fortitude, in spite of his own beliefs, he continues to
enumerate the signs of the "revival of antiquity". And they amount
to dozens of pages. Here are some:
- "Arnold (of Brescia) restored the equestrian order".
- "Pope Alexander III revives again the heathen triumph of the
ancient emperors".

119
 - "The famous name of Hannibal again appeared in a medieval
surname, from which over several centuries senators, military leaders
and cardinals had originated".
- "The Roman people were imbued at this time with a new
spirit; as in antiquity, in the times of Camillus and Coriolanus (this
is, as it is thought today, 'great antiquity.') They marched forth for
the conquest of Tuscany and Lazium. Once more all the field of
battle appeared Roman banners with the ancient initials S.P.Q.R.".
In a word, if one is to summarize, all these and other fundamental
institutions of "ancient" Rome suddenly "were renewed". True, there
is nothing said about how the rulers happened to know of them
after hundreds of years of complete disregard! - All of these rites of
triumph· ancient initials and other attributes of "antiquity" - Who
remembered them in the "dark ages" of desolation and barbarity?
This is supposedly a mystery of European history.
As regards art, in the 13th century, in the opinion of the traditional
historiography, it was based on the ruthless plunder of the "ancient"
structures and their transformation during the Middle Ages. For
example, they tell us that the medieval Romans used "ancient
sarcophagi" for their burials. Apparenyly, they were unable to make
their own. Therefore, the medieval cardinal Guglielmo Fieski, who
died in 1256, "lies in an ancient marble sarcophagus, the reliefs of
which portray a Roman wedding, a strange symbol for a cardinal"!
The surprise of Ferdinand Gregorovius is fully justified. He
bridled at it: really - were the medieval Cardinals so poor that
they had to use "ancient" sarcophagi, discarding from them the
remains of their own forefathers? This is just blasphemy.
Yes, blasphemy. But only in the event that one considers the
sarcophagus to have been made in time immemorial and not an
original example of medieval art.
There are sarcophagi that generally are not understood.
For example, in the senatorial mausoleum in Arceli. This
"monument combines within itself classic antiquity with medieval
forms as a strange form: a marble urn with Bacchic reliefs... serves
as a base on which is raised a sarcophagus with a Gothic
superstructure embellished with a mosaic".
According to Ferdinand Grcgorovius' treatment, only at the end
of the 13th century do new, original mausoleums unlike the "ancient"
begin to appear. To account for this the historian is again at a loss:
"Not one memorial of the famous people of the first half of the

120
13th century has been preserved".
But why be surprised? The Rome in Italy was founded as a
capital city not earlier than the 14th century A.D.
The strictest adherence to the Scaligerian chronology compels
Ferdinand Gregorovius to assume things which can be accounted-
for only with difficulty. When he speaks about the powerful Guelph
and Gibelline clans of the aristocracy in medieval Rome he is obliged.
in order to avoid violating the preestablished historical scheme,
to speak of them living in the ruins of the ancient hot baths. They
"owned the slopes of Quirinal and built their own fortifications
near the forum of imperial times ... here were ... the Capocci, who
had found lodging in the thermae, whereas nearby, in the
Constantine thermae, was located the fourth castle of Colonus".
Any time Ferdinand Gregorovius had to choose between basic
common sense and bis loyalty to Scalligerian chronology, loyalty
always prevailed.
Biblical and ancient personages appear in medieval dress in
the art of the centuries that immediately preceded the Renaissance.
On the portals of the cathedrals, Old Testament kings and
Patriarchs adjoin ancient sages and personages of the Gospel. It
is as if, in the view of the artists and sculptors, they all are
contemporaries in time.
Famous gladiator fights are an obvious sign of the "distant
ancient past".
Isn't this so? But according to the information given by the
historian V.Klassovsky, such fights occurred in the Europe of the
14th century, in particular in Naples around 1344. These fights, as
too in antiquity, ended with the death of one fighter.
Medieval troubadours begin, in the to-11th centuries, to develop
subjects which are believed ancient by all of us. In the 1tth century
the "history of Ulysses" (Odyssey) appeared, in which the account
known to us as Homeric was set forth in "a medieval interpretation"
(knights, ladies, duels and the like). The troubadours were proud of
the history of the Trojan War sentimentalized by them, which they
considered as far from trite, inasmuch as no onc had composed it
before them! It was almost a national subject for them. The Franks
considered themselves to have originated in Troy.
These threads were woven into one great, romanticized
campaign by the Argonauts of this same Trojan War in France
when the crusader conquerors, their real-world prototypes, were en
121
route to faraway countries in Asia.
Since it has become a question of art, we shall return to Pompeii,
already excavated by the Archaeologists. Are there signs there of a
"Middle Ages"? There are.
Some of them are discussed in V. Klassovsky's hook about
Pompeii.
This researcher noted a very high level of graphic art (frescos,
mosaics and statues) in combination with scientific achievements
typical of the Renaissance epoch. For example, a sun dial has been
found which is separated into "unifonn portions", an instrument, the
creation of which was a difficult task even in the later Middle Ages.
"The discovery of a collection of surgical instruments, is even
more worthy of attention, in that among them are some that were
thought until then to have been invented only at a later time by
the luminaries of the newest surgical medicine".
The purely medieval is encountered among the graffiti (drawings
on the walls); a hangman in a hood. a soldier in a helmet with a
visor. Of course, it is assumed that these are drawings of gladiators.
The drawing is striking on which is quite distinctly portrayed a
medieval knight in a helmet with a visor - a typical knight's equi pmcnt.
V.Klassovsky; "what has often struck me is ... that Pompeii's
antiquities are sometimes as similar to the latest objects as arc two
drops of water".
Some famous Pompeii mosaics arc strikingly similar in
composition, coloring and style to the frescos of Rafael and Giulio-
Romano. Could these indeed be iXlrtrayals created either by these
great artists or by their imitators? .. Traditional history is silent.

Gynaecological s dilators from Pompeii.

122
EGIIT'S ME#-D"'IE""v:""1\L"'--- ===
ALCHEM"Y CHAP"R SEVEN

Once upon a time on the shores of the Nile there lived a people
who erected grandiose structures, the sense and meaning of which
we still to this day do not understand fully. For example, the
pyramids. There is a whole branch of science which is called
pyramidology, whose disci pIes put forth the most diverse proposals
about how they were erected. The great Sphinx, statues, steles and
sarcophagi - in a word, everything that composes the visible features
of a bygone Egypt, are researched century after century.
At the same time, no one doubts the most profound antiquity of
the Egyptian structures. True, they name the most diverse time intervals:
3,500 years ago, 4,000, 5,000... P.Brighton writes about the great
Sphinx: "It is more likely that the statue was created even before the
sand appeared in these places, when the Sahara was still a huge sea".
That is, it is a question of tens of thousands of years.
The record belongs to Helena Blavatsky: "... the pyramids of
Egypt were built approximately 200,000 years ago, 10,000 years
before the second catastrophe of Atlantis".
The majority of Egyptologists do not risk following Helena
Blavatsky, but when there are arguments about one or the other
dynasty of the pharaohs or the age of the next sensational find
extracted from the bowels of the pyramids, then it is only within
the limits of the temporal framework designated by the Scaligcrian
chronology. Expressing it figuratively, modern Egyptology is an
imposing pyramid of settled opinions that, it seems, it is impossible
to sway with anything.
Facts or opinions that contradict deep-rooted views are thrown
out by the Egyptologists straightaway. Everything is tolerated, but
only if there is no doubt about the antiquity of the pyramids. Even
discussions are tolerated that extraterrestrials or residents of Atlantis,
which afterwards was lost in the ocean depths, helped the Egyptians,
and that the builders of the pyramids possessed the skill to lift to
any height the large-tonnage blocks of the pyramids with the help
t 23
of glances! Any stupidity is acceptable, if it does not affect the
foundation of the foundations - the official chronology.
The reason for such an attitude toward criticism is
understandable: too many scientific authorities and careers rest
on the foundation of the traditional notions about Egypt. Cracks
in this foundation threaten to destroy the works of whole
generations of Egyptologists.
Moreover, ever more facts are accumulated with every year
that arc evidence that the pyramids were built only 800 - 900
years ago. (Igor Davidenko, Yaroslav Kesler "The Book of
Civilization", pages 2" -224).
These facts have accumulated, firstly, in connection with
attempts to answer the cardinal question: how, if one is to believe
the traditional views, were the ancient Egyptians able with the aid
of the most primitive of equi pment to build the pyramids and
other grandiose structures? There has not been and there is no an
answer in the official historiography.
Engineers, who have been assigned the goal of recreating the
building equi pment that the Egyptians supposedly had, try at times
to help the historians However, these attempts invariably lead to
deplorable results. As Jorge Angel Uvraga attests in the book "Thebes",
a Japanese expedition recently made one such attempt, the building
of a miniature pyramid to meters high from blocks weighing up to
one tonne with the help of cranes from palm trunks. You sec, they
depict such contrivances in particular in drawings which explain
how the Egyptians erected the pyramids. They soon had to abandon
this undertaking: the trunks broke like matches. And these blocks
weighed only one tonne each, whereas blocks of the pyramids weigh
from 50 to 500 tonnes). (jorge Livraga "Thebes". 1997).
The hypothesis of dragging the giant pyramid blocks along a
sandy mound is well known. But in order to construct a sand
mountain 145 meters high, one needs to cover the whole valley of
the Nile so that the mountain would have enough hard ground.
The German engineer Louis Croon made calculations which show
that it was impossible to use earthen embankments, since their
construction would require the same amount of labor as the
construction of the pyramid itself, and "nonetheless, they would
not allow finishing the last meters of the pyramid's top".
The adherents of the new chronology, who are relying on strictly
scientific data, have a clear and precise answer to the question raised:
124
first of all in the works of the well-known chemist Joseph Davidovits,
a specialist in the area of the low-temperature synthesis of materials.
In 1972, he organized the private research company CORDI in France,
and in 1979, an institute of geopolymers (the Geopolymer Institute),
also in France. Joseph Davidovits founded a new branch of applied
chemistry called geopolymeri7..ation. Its basic postulate is that one
can make concrete from pulverized rock which is practically
indistinguishable from natural stone.
"Any rock can be used in a ground form, and the geopolymer
concrete produced from it is indistinguishable from natural stone.
Geologists who are not acquainted with the possibilities of
geopolymcrization ... accept geopolymer concrete as natural stone...
Neither high temperatures nor high pressures are needed for the
production of such an artificial stone. Geopolymer concrete sets
quickly at room temperature and turns into a beautiful artificial
stone", writes Joseph Davidovits.
Neither modern technology nor modern knowledge is needed
for the discovery geopolymer concrete. Many years of observation
and experience are enough. This discovery can be made within the
framework of medieval alchemy. It is not for nothing that Joseph
Davidovits called one of his books, "Alchemy and Pyramids".
The word "concrete" should not mislead readers. It is fully
not like the concrete used in modern construction. It can be soft
like sandstone, and it can be hard, too. Such are the peculiarities of
gcopolymerization.
Joseph Davidovits has put forth an idea about the construction
of the pyramids in particular from goopolymer concrete in its soft
variant. During the Middle Ages, during the heyday of alchemy, the
princi pIes of obtaining artificial stone were discovered.
In the Scaligerian history it is acceptable to consider that
alchemy is a "pre-scientific current in the development of chemistry"
which originated in Egypt. Specialists get the name of the science
of chemistry itself from the Egyptian word Kham or Khemi, which
meant Egypt.
The main purpose of alchemy, in the opinion of the traditionalist
historians, was the creation of the so-called Philosophers' Stone.
This stone was considered magical inasmuch as it turned iron
into gold. That is, they suggest to us that medieval alchemists
were involved, in general, with nonsense. Only sometimes, at odd
125
moments and completely by accident, they discovered useful things
- without, of course, intending to. MJua in his "History of
Chemistry" writes: "The positive role of alchemy is in the discovery
or improvement (in the process of the search for a miracle-working
media) of methods of the recei pt of practically valuable products:
of mineral and plant dyes, glass, enamels, metal alloys, acids, alkalis,
salts, - and also in the development of some techniques of laboratory
equi pment... " (M. Jua "History of Chemistr". 1975).
They assume that the "philosophers" stone" was known in Egypt,
the home of chemistry, but then people lost the secret of its manufacture.
If one understands as the "philosopher's stone" geopolymer concrete,
then, most likely, it happened thus: up until a certain point people
knew how to make it, and then they lost the reci pc.
This is not the only case in the history of mankind when
people created unique things and technologies, extremely important
for military affairs, and then lost the secrets of their manufacture.
It is enough to recall medieval Damascus steel from which they
forged sabers that did not lose sharpness, versatile and at the same
time indestructible by other, ordinary sabers. It took over two
centuries of searching to unravel, only in the middle of the 20th
century, how they made Damascus steel.
Gcopolymer concrete was, to the Egyptians, a secret of great
military importance, as was Damascus steel. Using it, they were
able to quickly and effiCiently raise defensive fortresses with walls
of any height and thickness. It was a building material of the
majority of the grandiose structures of Egypt. But the technology
necessary to do so was not stored in the safes of the design bureaus
or on the disks of computers. The necessary procedures were handed
orally from generation to generation, and, at the death of the last
man in the chain of transmission, no one any longer knew how it
had been accomplished. And this happened in Egypt during the
bloody clashes and wars of the late Middle Ages.
Joseph Davidovits has studied why this construction material
was used in the first place in Egypt, in Africa and Asia Minor. It
turned out that mud from the Nile River contains alumina, which
is an important constituent component of a Similar concrete.
Another component is sodium carbonate, which exists in large
quantities in the Egyptian deserts and salt lakes. The rest of the
components necessary for geopolymerizatiol1 are in abundance.
126
 Joseph Davidovits' proposals find convincing support. On
the blocks that are located on the upper tiers of the pyramids are
found the impressions o{ mats on their surfaces. This means that
the builders made forms using mats and filled them with concrete.
Simple and effective. No building technology is needed which is
capable of relocating large-tonnage blocks. One can make a block,
for example of 500 tonnes, since it is only necessary to pour the
concrete quickly, without interruption.
While studying examples of blocks, Joseph Davidovits discovered
hairs in one of them. Three laboratories where he turned with a
request to determine what it is answered unambiguously: "A small
filament from three organic fibers, most likely hairs." The presence
of hairs in natural limestone has been ruled out. Limestone was
formed nearly 50 million years ago on the bottom of the ocean. No
one ever finds hair in natural limestone. [f this is indeed concrete,
then the hair, which fell, let us say, from the hand of a worker or was
detached from a hair rope, is fully understandable.
The reaction of the Egyptologists to Joseph Davidovits' discoveries
was a curious one. In 1982, the well-known Egyptian Egyptologist,
Jean~Philli ppe Lauer presented the chemist two examples of stones
from the pyramids of Cheops and Teti and demanded evidence that
they are artificial. As a result of chemical analysis in two different
laboralories it was discovered unambiguously that the examples are
made from artificial stone and are not fragments of natural rock.
They contain chemical clements which are not encountered in rock.
Joseph Davidovits reported this at the Congress of
Egyptologists that took place in Toronto in that same 1982.
Knowing very well that it had been he himself who had provided
the samples analyzed, Lauer nonetheless dismissed the result in a
newspaper interview as "Sensible, but impossible". (Joseph
Davidovits Alchemy and Pyramids. Translated (rom French by
Andrew James and Jacquelille James. Geopolymer fnstitute, 198],
Miami Sh.ores).
In 1992-93, a team from the German Archaeological Institute
headed by Professor Rainer Stadelman and the project author Rudolf
Gantenbrink performed research of the so~called "lower southern
shaft" of the Cheops (Khufu) pyramid. There are fOllr such shafts, or
tunnels. They measure 30 by 30 centimeters. They go out from the
rooms of the pharaoh and his wife at various angles.
127
t. The !ower southern shaft. which is indicated on the drawing by the blue color, does not
have an exit to the surface.

2. Remote-rontrolJed robots with video cameras were used.

3. At firsf the video camera 4. Further on blocks appeared

showed btocks with rough with a processed surface. On
surfaces. No traces of sawing them are clearly seen the stains
are visible on the blocks. of the mortar and impressions
This is not slone mined in a left by the trowels with which they
quarry wilh the help of special removed the excess mortsr.
saws. This is crude concrete. Below the leaking mortar had
hardened in /he form of a
"washbosrd w•
128
5. The abrasions from the 6. So much monar buill up i(l
trowels are also visible here. thiS place that mounds were
fof7TlfJd on Ihe floor.

7. Finalty, the main thing: the
robol ran into a block which cut
off the tunnel, And two copper
handles were highlighted on the
bloCk which were fastened using
lhe mortar.
8. Close-up of Ihe teft haff of Ihe
broken-off handle. The binding
of Ihe mortar is clearly seen.
The head is bent over and also
somewhat stopped up with
concrete.

In commenting on the pictures, archaeologists generally do not

mention the mortar, The copper handles, in their opinion, are fastened
into open-ended openings in the block. In other words, the ancient
craftsmen from the beginning (4,000 years ago!) made holes with an
unknown instrument in the strongest granite block, it being so accurate
that they did not break off onc unnecessary bit of stOIlC. Then, from
the back side tbey shoved the copper rods through them and with a
hammer bent their cnds into the shape of handles.
The German archaeologists were not able to imagine another
method of fastening. The b.aggage of traditional notions is too great.
After these photographs were published, Egypt forbid the
scientists further investigations. In all account of the expedition,
published on the site http://www.cheops.org, Rudolf Gantcndring
has written about this so: "Since late March, 1993 my efforts to
continue on-site investigation of the shafts of Cheops have been
blocked by outside influences".
129
 Geopolymer concrete allows unraveling also the numerous
mysteries of the Egyptian stone articles which also are considered
ancient. For example, stone amphora. They were made supposedly
of diorite, onc of the hardest of stant'S. Modern sculptors do not
even try to usc it. The Egyptian craftsmen, not baving, according
to traditional views, anything besides copper chisels, nevertheless
used it constantly. And achieved incredible results with it!

Concrete "ancient· Egyptian» slab with traces of accessories on the bottom.

Egyptian museum. 1999.

Joseph Oavidovits' discovery fully resolves this riddle. These

vessels were made from artificial stone on a common potter's wheel.
The still unhardened concrete was processed like soft clay. It is
easy to make an amphora with a narrow neck and walls of the same
thickness on a potter's wheel. After setting, the material of the
amphora was as hard as diorite or quartz.
There is direct evidence that many Egyptian statues were made
from geopolymer concrete. The "unfinished head of the Queen
Nefertiti", which has become a standard for feminine beauty for all
time, is well known to everyone. It is considered that the sculpture
was made from natural stone. The legend says that an unknown
great sculptor with the help of a copper chisel carved this beautiful
head from a piece of stone, but he did not finish his work. They
either killed him or drove him into slavery...
But what do we S<-'e? A scam goes .. long the line of symmetry of
130
Nefertiti's head, along the middle of the forhead, through the tip of
the nose and along the middle of the chin. Such a seam could have
arisen only if the sculptu.re had been cast in a form made beforehand.
It is done the same way todsy when mass-producing anything molded.
That is, the form is created from two or more sectional parts, a Iiqu.id
mass is poured inside, and when this mass hardens, the parts which
comprise the mold are separated. Seams remain along the joints which

are then ground down. The basic technology involved has not
changed in many centuries.
Usually the craftsman polishes his articles to a high luster
before the material has completely hardened. But here everything
was abandoned at the half-way point. However, as a result we see
as it werc a frozen moment in the process of the creation of the
sculpture itself. A rare stroke of luck.
True, traditionalist Egyptologists don't think so. Therefore,
photographs of Nefertiti which are printed in books are usually
made in such a way that the seam on her face is not apparent, that
is they photograph the sculpture from one side. No crease shows
and, consequently, there arc no questions which are unacceptable
for the Scaliger chronology.
One more fact that is mysterious for the traditionalists. It is a
question of the so-called Egyptian stone engraving. Thjs engraving
possesses truly unbelievable properties. While studying it, Joseph
Davidovits discovered that the instrument with the aid of which
13\
the inscriptions were made, supposedly went into the stone so
assuredly that it left no chi ps and no burrs. The bottom of the
inscri pUons is completely even and smooth, without traces of the
cutting edge of the instruments. And the grains of the granite
were not destroyed! But this result cannot be duplicated today
even if one cuts the inscri ptions with an extra-hard cutting tool.
In fact, there are no mysteries here. The inscri pUons where
not carved, but embossed in the still soft geopolymer concrete.
Therefore, hard specks that were encountered simply were pressed
into the soft mass without any damage.
The explanations given by the traditionalists for many of
Egypt's mysteries are sometimes curious. There is a large granite
sarcophagus in the Cheops pyramid which, in its dimensions, is
not able to pass through the narrow passageways and doors which
lead to the room. How can it be? Historians maintain that at
first they installed the sarcophagus on the site and then erected
the pyramid around it. We shall agree for a minute with this
statement. But even then what the archaeologists discovered as
early as in the time of Napoleon's expedition to Egypt remains
unexplained. They discovered the Valley of the Kings, with its
numerous huge sarcophagi in the high mountains. In which
connection, a single narrow entrance leads into the Valley, which
was hacked into the cliffs. There are no other entrances. Just how
did the sarcophagi get there? Did they really drag them through
the steep mountains and cliffs? It would have been simpler to
widen the entrance into the Valley.
Everything falls into place when you recall geopolymer
concrete. They poured the sarcophagi at the site.
Engineers have approached the problem from another aspect of
it: they computed the mass of the pyramids. Just the Cheops pyramid
alone weighs six and a half million toones, and all the pyramids
that have remained intact down to our time fewer than twenty
million toones. But this is only the weight of those blocks that are
free from defects. Where are the defective blocks? Where are the
mountains of waste at the stone quarry? There are no cavaties of 100
million tonnes either near the pyramids or far away - no quarries
from which they could have extracted 100-120 million tonnes of
limestone monoliths. They mined material in the known Quarries
for facing the pyramids and temples, but not for blocks. The remnants
132
of the facing material at the top of the pyramid of Cheops is natural
limestone. ("The Book of Civilization").
The French scientist, Paul Lucas, who visited Egypt at the
end of the 17 th or the start of the 18th century, was of the opinion
that the "pyramids are faced with cement and not with stone". It
was Paul Lucas who acquainted both the French and the rest of
the world with Egypt, yet they proclaim him for some reason an
"unreliable guide".
Egyptologists constantly mention Herodotus, whom they
consider an ancient historian. He really did write about Egypt
and talk about the equi pment for building the pyramids. But we
will have to grope for the sense of his deseri ption: "when they had
first made it thus, they raised the remaining stones with machines
made of short pieces of timber. .. for as many as were the courses of
the steps, so many machines there were also. Perhaps they transferred
one and the same machine, made so as easily to be carried, to each
stage successively".
Herodotus is obviously describing a mechanism for moving
the casing from level to level. It is impossible to lift large-tonnage
blocks with any kind of scaffolding of short beams.
The question of by what means the ancient Egyptians carried 50-
150 tonne monol.iths, and even more so at 500 tannes, is not even
IXlsed by traditional Egyptologists. They and their adherents have
no variants. There are, it is true, articles and books where it is
maintained that the builders of the pyramids possessed secrets which
allowed them to concentrate some kind of mystic energy beneath the
skids of the platforms on which the blocks stocxi, and in that way
make them almost weightless and move them without particular
efforts. But it isn't possible to consider them as scientific evidence.
More evidence of the youth of the pyramids was found in 1954.
The Egyptian archaeologist Kamal-el-Mallakh discovered in a
subterranean chamber to the south of the Cheops pyramid a wooden
boat. It was built from cedar, sycamore and zizyphus, or jujube, has a
length of 46 meters and a width (at the center) of almost six meters
and ends at the bow and stern with masts. In the middle of the
boat is a closed cabin. The boat is equipped with six pairs of oars.
On it, according to the assertions of the Egyptologists, they carried
the remains of the Pharaoh Cheops himself for burial in the pyramid,
that is. nearly 4,600 years ago.
133
 Shortly after nearby they found onc more chamber with
another funeral boat. They disassembled, hauled out and assembled
the first one again for display in a museum. They walled up the
second one again. It would not be worth mentioning these details
if not for one circumstance: it struck thc researchers that the smell
of the cedar lumber was preserved in the chambers. (t turns out
that the smell had not vanished in 4,500 years! A miracle.
However, this is not the main thing. The boats were made
from boards that were straight, long and somehow sewn to the
frames with side members and deck beams. The plank-made, flat
deck and the cabin on the deck were worked "into a groove," that
is, speaking in modern language, chisels and bits were used.

In order to get such boards, smooth and well fitted to each

other, iron rip saws are needed. Even better are steel. No other
instrument, especially the stone or copper axes of the ancient Egyptian,
is suitable. The boards of the boat's hull are bent and also fitted
to each other. Meanwhile, the technology for bending straight
boards is not simple and unknown to residents of the deserts
where cven cedars don't grow.
The Egyptian restorers are of the opinion that the boards of the
huH were connected with lashings wltil fully water-tight. However,
on the boards of the boat exhibited in the museum, there are no lashings
and no grooves for them. How then did they assemble it? Where
did the ancient shi p builders find steel nails... The technology for
134
the manufacture of funeral boaL'i dates to the middle ages.
Egyptian boat bUilding generally offers traditionalist
historians unpleasant surprises. The following report was found
by us in the press.
In the National Park of New South Wales (Australia), 100
kilometers north of Sydney. (that is, on the shore of the Pacific
Ocean), petroglyphs were found in the crevasse of a cliff. This
happened almost 100 years ago. [n the fact itself of their existence
there would be nothing of surprise if they had not been, as was
ascertained, ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs.
In which connection, they are dated to the most antediluvian
of the well known forms of Egyptian writing, which resembles
Sumerian writing and with which only a limited number of
Egyptologists are acquainted; therefore, an opinion appeared that
the given hieroglyphs must be modern forgeries.

Hieroglyphs o( National
Park o( New South Wales
(Australia)

135
 Howeyer, the Egyptologist Ray Johnson, who was taking part
in the translations of the texl<; from the Cajro Antiqu.ities Museum
collection. was able to translate the Australian inscriptions. He
ascertained that on the walls were a record by Egyptian travelers
who had endured a shi pwreck "in a strange and hostile land",
and also information about the premature death of their leader.
From the inscri ption it appears that this leader belonged to a
royal family and was the son of the Pharaoh Djedefr, who had
replaced the Pharaoh Khufu (Cheops), to whom the official academic
history ascribes the construction of the Great Pyramid on the Giza
Plateau. Both the death itself of the leader from snake poison and
the ritual of his burial are described in detail.

It turns out that fiye thousand years ago the Egyptians had
crossed the expanses of the oceans in their boats which were tied
together with lashings! Inasmuch as this proposal does not sustain
criticism, the hieroglyphs in Australia are hushed up or explained,
as alrcady has bccl1 said, as a forgery. Otherwise, one would have
136
to recognize that Egyptian seafarers had perfectly seaworthy craft
and instruments for navigation. And this is by no means typical
of ancient times.
At the same time, one would have to agree with the fact that
relations with Australia were being established at a rather high
level. No one would send the son of a Pharaoh to a far~off land, to
unknown distances.
It also says in the report that the hieroglyphs allow looking
anew at the whole series of finds in both regions. Such things as a
statuette of the god Tot in the form of a monkey, figurines of the
scarab beetle (sacred to the Egyptians) in that very same New
South Wales and a pyramidal structure lip to 100 feet high
(approximately 30 meters) are in Australia. Or that the petrified
remains of a kangaroo and collections of Australian boomerangs
were found in Egypt.
There is evidence in Australia of lively contact of the two regions
also in the form of the coincidence of a whole series of local legends
and practices with Egyptian equivalents. The Aborigines of Arnhem
Land and the Torres Straits mummified their dead, using a
technology simllar to the Egyptian. They removed the organs from
the dead person and the soft tissues from the stomach cavity, and
also his brain, making a cut for this in the area of the nostrils with a
bone instrument. After inserting artificial eyes of pearls into the
mummy, they embalmed the corpse and carried it for two miles to
the west across the sea on a boat similar to the boat of Ra of the
Egyptians for burial on the island of the dead.
As early as 1874, the Shevert Expedition discovered a
mummified corpse and a canoe which was used in the burial rite
on Darnley Island. Scientist and physician Rafael Silento, who
has studied the mummy, has established that both the cuts and the
method of embalming are the same as those practiced in Egypt. In
1931, Sir Grafton Elliot-Smith studied a mummy's skull, which
was found in a New Zealand cave, and came to the conclusion that
the skull belonged to an Egyptian.
But let us return to Egypt.
As stated above, the traditionalist Egyptologists themselves
do not adhere to a single opinion regarding Egypt's chronology.
The Egyptologist Pierre Daniel Chantepie de la Saussaye explains
one of the reasons. He wrote at the end of the 19th century:
137
 "Egyptology, thanks to which the gloom that has been covering
Egyptian antiquity is being swept away for the first time, was born
only 80 years ago ... The results of the investigations were
popularized, alas, too hastily... Thus, many false views came into
everyday currency" ...
As it is said in one of the contemporary works on the
archaeology of antiquity, the first outlines of Egyptian chronology
were based on the work of Manethon, who is considered an ancient
Egyptian historian of the 4th-3rd centuries B.C. He compiled a
list of Pharaohs, grouping them inlo 30 dynasties and, having put
together the years of reigns, calculated the duration of the Egyptian
state. The numbers turned out to be huge. Basing themselves on
him, Flinders Petrie, Ludwig Borhard and other Egyptologists
estimated the duration of Ancient Egypt's history as five to six
thousand years.
There also is a short chronology. It is based on the supposition
that Pharaohs ruled simultaneously, as co-rulers in different
parts of the country. However, even this doesn't explain anything.
Here is what the well-known Egyptologist Heinrich Brugsch writes:
"Can one consider any kind of epochs or moments of the history
of the Pharaohs as established in the chronological relation once
and for all? ... When a reader turns for clarification to the tables
compiled by various scientists, he stops with surprise at the very
different opinions and computations of the years of the Pharaohs".
(Heinrich Brugsch "Egypt under the Pharaohs". 1880).
A number of German scientists have defined the time of the
ascent to the throne of Menes, the first Pharaoh. It would be more
precise to say - the "times", since Bocckh ascribed this event to
5702 B.C., and Bunsen - to 3623 S.c. A discrepancy of 2,079
years! Really, that is something to surprise the reader.
Total chaos reigns in the determination of the succession of
the reigns of the Pharaohs. Herodotus in his famous "History"
puts the reigns of Pharaohs Rhampsinitos and Cheops back to
back, calling Cheops the successor of Rhampsinitos.
A modern commentator confidently sets Herodotus straight:
"Herodotus is confusing Egypt's chronology: Rhampsinitos
(Ramses II) is king of the 19th dynasty (1345-1200 B.C.), and
Cheops is the 4" dynasty 2600-2480 B.C.)".
Here the mismatch with today's accepted chronological version
138
amounts to more than 1,200 years. In general it turns out that "the
Herodotus chronology of the kings does not correspond to the royal
chronology in the fragments of Manethon's royal lists".
An even more complex situation has been created around a
list of the kings which was compiled by Sumerian priests. The
tremendous antiquity which is ascribed to these lists today
contradicts the archaeological data. We shall cite only one, but
sufficiently glaring, example.
Reporting on the excavations of the royal graves in
Mesopotamia, Leonard Wooley talks about a series of discoveries
of golden toilet articles. And here unexpectedly, as Leonard Wooley
writes, "one of the best experts declared that these things were of
Arabic work of the 13th century A.D. And it is impossible to
reproach him for such an error", the author says indulgently, "for
you see no one suspected that such good art was able to exist in
the third millennium before our era".
In other words, one can ascribe any qualities to the things
found as Leonard Wooley does, provided that one does not violate
the commonly accepted chronology. The thought itself that the
toilet articles belong to the Middle Ages seems absurd to him.
Not only do the archaeological discoveries testify to medieval
origin of the Egyptian wonders, but also the stars.
In those times astrology and the compilation of horoscopes
enjoyed huge popularity. Such significance was attributed to the
influence of the planets on the fate of people that the astrologists
scrupulously and thorougbly recorded the position of the planets in
their horoscopes. Having fixed, at one moment in time the positions
of the planets relative to the constellations, and knowing the periods
of the orbits of the planets around the sun, one can calculate the
positions of the planets in the zodiac in the past or the future.
The simplicity of the idea, however, is complicated by the
necessity for intricate and lengthy calculations. Tables exist, like
the canons of ecli pses, which contain the calculated horoscopes.
This opens up possibilities for dating ancient descriptions of
horoscopes. Provided the positions of the planets in the
constellations arc described in the text, then, using the tables, one
can,as in the case of ecli pses, determine the possible dates when these
alignments oeurred.
Anatoly Fomenko and other astronomers and mathematicians
139
have analyzed the most famous of the ancient horoscopes and
discovered that all of them, in their unbiased dating, yield medieval
and even late medieval dates.
There are in the Denderah temple in Egypt the famous Round
and Long Zodiacs.
On the basis of the archaeological data, the temple and
horoscopes, which are depicted on the zodiacs, now are dated 30
B.C. and 14-37 A. D. But numerous attempts to calculate the
horoscopes' antiquity have not been crowned with success, although
such prominent scientists as Laplace, Fourier, Letronne, Biot and
Chelm have worked on them.
Nonetheless, there are precise astronomical solutions. There
arc two possibilities - only two, and both are radically at odds
with commonly accepted ideas. They are:
568 and 540 A. D. or:
1394 and 1422 A.D.
Only in these years did the position of the planets correspond
precisely to what is portrayed on the zodiacs.
In 1857, Heinrich Brugsch discovered an ancient Egyptian
sarcophagus, on the inner lid of which was depicted a starry sky
with a horoscope. The whole burial ritual, the form of demotic
writing involved and the like date the discovery to not earlier
than the year I A.D. But attempts of astronomers to date the
horoscope itself at the start of the new era have not been successful.
Meanwhile, a precise solution not only exists, but is the only one
possible in the whole historical timespan: this is 1682 A.D.
In 1901, William Matthew Flinders Petrie discovered a cave
in Upper Egypt with an ancient Egyptian burial and with two
horoscopes which indicated the dates of the death of the father
and the son, who were buried in the cave. There exists a single
solution in the whole historical interval that ideally satisfies all
the conditions of the task:
1049 A.D. (horoscope of the father),
1065 A.D. (horoscope of the son).
The son died 15 years after the father. This dating explains
in particular also the splendid undamaged state of these "ancient
Egyptian" drawings which were executed with water colors.

140
WHAT THE PIRAMIDS
CHAPTER EIGHT

The pharaoh played a special role in the lives of the Egyptians.

It is impossible to translate this word as "tsar". "king", or "emperor"_
The pharaoh was the supreme ru lef and at the same time the supreme
priest. The pharaoh was a god on earth and a god after death.
His name was not to be pronounced in vain. The term "pharaoh"
itself appeared from the word combination of two Egyptian words
"per - aa". which meant "great house". That is, they were talking
about the ruler allegorically, while not calling him by name. And it
was possible you know, after all, to put the evil eye on someone.
According to the beliefs of the Egyptians, the god Ra himself
- the sun god ~ was the first pharaoh.
According to the traditional chronology, 30 dynasties of
pharaohs arc counted in the history of Egypt! Why so many? Let us
recall what is said in the previous chapter: the first Egyptologists
were guided by the already predetermined historiography, therefore,
they endeavored to arrange the crumbs of infonnation that came to
them about the country along the artificially stretched out Greco-
Roman chronology, within the framework of Christian tradition.
Heinrich Brugsch wrote about the Egyptian chronology with
grief: ... "we at the present time have only a heap of ruins in the
place of the whole that was built".
It would seem that to build the structure of Egyptology on
"ruins" does not make sense. Nonetheless, this structure was
composed containing all the absurdities and contradictions which
were placed into its contrived foundation. For example,
"periodicities" - repetitions of Egyplian history - clearly show
through in the Scaligerian version. This happened when the
historians moved the phantom reflections of one and the same
medieval realities into the distant past. It was necessary then to fill
the huge spaces of time with something in the artificially stretched
Ollt Egyptian history!

141
 Chantepie de ta Saussaye in "An Illustrated History of
Religion" established:
"If we turn now to the later times in Egyptian history, then,
to our surprise, we will note that the Sait culture reproduces precisely
the culture of the epoch of the pyramids. The texts which had
been used three thousand years ago again are coming into use.
Again they adorn the graves in the age-old way".
Heinrich Brugsch added: "The names of the contemporary
peoples of the 12111 and especially of the 11 th dynasties are returning
to the monuments of the 18th dynasty in the very same forms ... In
these two periods of Egyptian history will appear one and the same
tombs with the identical decorations on them. Here before us is a
historic riddle, for the resolution of which we still don't have
enough resources.
On the walls of the Egyptian temples the scientists have discovered
inscri ptions which are devoted to the pharaohs, which are separated
in time into millennia by the Scaligerian chronology. Similar
periodicities have received the name "restorations". And SO Chantepie
de la Saussaye wrote: "After the 19th dynasty a restoration sets in...
Egypt again is returning to the ancient time of the construction of the
pyramids... the ancient titles of the kings, neglected for more than
two thous.and years, again are being brought into use".
Why? The exceptional conservatism of the Egyptians, in the
opinion of the traditionalists, is the reason. They liked everything
the way it was two or three millennia ago, so they were repeating
one and the same thing for hundreds and hundreds of years. "One
can accept from first glance the inscri ptions of that time, even of
private people, as being the works of the Ancient Kingdom ... In
this regard, the illustrations on the walls of the tombs known to us
from the Ancient Kingdom of field work and rural scenes are
especially characteristic for this epoch". And this is after two
thousand years! True, it is unclear who over the centuries
remembered the customs, ceremonies, rituals and names of the people
of the distant past.
No one knows how many Pharaohs there were in any event.
But at least would the names be known precisely of those who left
the inscri ptions on the walls of the pyramids and temples? It
turns out, no. The American chronologist Elias Bickerman notes
that the names of the Egyptian kings "arc given in a conditional,
completely arbitrary ... way which is accepted in the history
142
textbooks of the ancient Orient for institutes of higher learning.
These forms differ significantly from each other, and it is impossible
to put them into good order, since they are all the result of arbitrary
readings which have become traditional".
The well-known Egyptologist Schabas translates one of the
hieroglyphs as "hyena". Heinrich Brugsch, no less wcll·known,
thinks that it is more correct to translate it as "I ion" and he
reproaches Schabas because where he reads the next phrase, "You
are opening the mouth", the latter reads as "You are making an
opening in the fence". The impression is created that, in the
dcci phering of hieroglyphs,one can propose any number of variants.
When Heinrich Brugsch translated the inscri ption on the
top of the sarcophagus of the famous Pharaoh Menkaure (British
Museum), he inserted the classical names instead of the names of
the Egyptian gods. For example, Olympus, Urania, Chronos. For
this reason: each egyptologist interprets the inscriptions and their
meanings according to his own fancy. That his translation changes
radically the nature of the text, its perception, and even the whole
picture of the life of the Egyptians troubles him little.
They are not even completely sure how to read the
hieroglyphs. Heinrich Brugsch notes: "The hieroglyphs are read
in the direction in which the figures are facing, that is, from right
to left or from left to right, or even from top down". Yet it is
good that it isn't from bottom upwards. (Gleb Nosovskiy, Anatoly
Fomenko "Russia and Rome", Volume 3, page 437).
The situation isn't cleared up after the appearance of a literal
alphabet in place of hieroglyphs. There are hypotheses of when and
why they appeared, but about these later. Right now we shall note
that Egyptian names and texts were written with consonants alone,
as this has been cllstomary even up to today in Arabic writing and
Hebrew. Therefore, it does not follow that one must necessarily assume
that words written then must have contained the vowels that are in
them now. These are only the conventional additions of contemJX}rary
commentators. How closely they cOITCSJX}nd to reality, no one knows.
So, one has to guess at the meaning of the words in the sentences. It
is not difficult to understand how difficult it is to do if, let us
suppose, the word "man" is written only with the consonants "mn".
In such a form it can sound like "men", "moon", "moony", "mean",
"mcanie", "mine". That is, to have all kinds of meanings.
Therefore, in considering the names of the pharaohs or reading
143
the texts of the inscriptions in the temples and steles, one needs to
remember that their sound and meaning are the "result of an
arbitrary reading. It

However, for the lack of an allernative to it, we will be using

what there is. We will examine lhc pyramids and at the hazy
figures of their creators. And they, the creators, if one is to believe
the traditionalists, were strange people.
Judge for yourself. Modem history textbooks maintain that in
Egypt every new Pharaoh from the very first years of his reign began
to erect for himself a grandiose burial vault - a pyramid. The
construction sometimes took two dozen years, and during these years
the human and material resources of the country were at the full
disposal of the ruler. In fact an extraordinary situation is declared.
They deprived local slave owners of their property - their slaves
and draft animals· and the slave owners themselves became merely
overseers of the slaves, obliged to manage the work, and at the same
time to supply all this army of many thous<1.nds with food.
From which warehouses they delivered the products, how the
country survived in the years of construction, in what way it
defended itself from enemies or itself C<1.rried out wars of aggression
- all this remains on the peri phery of the traditional historiography,
which thinks that using that primitive equi pment the Egyptians
possessed, tens and hundreds of thousands of people and many years
were needed for the erection of the gigantic objects.
The traditionalist historians have, it would seem, weighty
arguments in favor of such a stale of affairs. Here is how Herodotus,
who is considered an ancient historian, described the situation with
the pyramids: "The Egyptian King Cheal" threw Egypt into every
sort of disaster. Most of all, he locked all the temples and forbade the
Egyptians the making of sacrifices, and then forced all Egyptians to
work on it... The erection of the pyramid lasted twenty years".
One of the inscri ptions on Egyptian monuments reads in the
translation of Heinrich Brugsch: "And for the first time the king
sent out a command to ... (broken) in order to convoke all the
builders from the city of Elephantina even to the city of Samhud...
and of all the heads and leaders of the people for the production of
the great breaking of solid stone for the raising of the great pyramid
to Hannah in the name of him as a blessed god ... and the great
and noble lords and leaders were transformed ... into the overseers
of the pieces and the loading onto the shi ps of the stones".
144
 Let us allow ourselves to doubt the veracity of these reports.
They tell us that every Pharaoh saw the main purpose of his life as
being to ensure that he slept after death in a brand new pyramid.
And the Egyptians - the palace elite, the priests, the military, the
working people - agreed with this and, hke lambs, let the government
have all their personal property for the achievement of this goal.
In other words, Egypt without interruption, over the centuries,
lived and worked only to create ever newer and newer tombs.
An extremely gloomy and unnatural picture.
Fortunately, it is purely speculative. It is more precise to say -
literary. The inscri ptions on the steles and pyramids were made
for the glorification of the dead pharaohs, for the praising of their
exploits and fulfillment in the edification of descendants. And
here unknown writers, as it is accepted in the East, didn't spare
either colors or exaggerations. One had to show the might of the
Pharaoh Akhenaten or Amenhotep IV, the submission of the country
to his will, a will equal to a god - and, as if by magic, "both the
great noble lords and the military leaders" seemingly started to
load the stones onto the shi ps themselves. And the builders,
wherever they lived, dropped everything and together with the
leaders and heads busied themselves with the pyramid.
Magnificent epithets are recalled in this connection which
poets bestowed upon the Chinese emperors, Turkish sultans and
Arab cali phs.
They possessed the world, ruled the elements, and
communicated directly with the Most High. Everything was used
in order to show how great and powerful was the adorable
sovereign. Although everyone knew that he was old, could hardly
walk and had not needed a harem for a long time ...
However, even when they did not love the ruler, they still
attributed to him much of what he was not able to complete.
Herodotus' talc about Cheops, who forced "all Egyptians to work
for him" is evidence of exactly this. It could be asked that, if all
Egyptians erected the pyramid, then who was it that grew the
grain and defended the country?
To invest all efforts and funds into the pyramids meant the
destruction of the state in a very few years' time. The laws of
economics are as inviolable in antiquity as they are in our time.
We see that they built the pyramids. However, we arc convinced
that not so many people were required to pour the blocks from
145
concrete. It wasn't necessary to stop the life of the whole country for
this. They even were able to make, and, in our opinion, make a profit
by taking a rational approach to the business pyramid-building, this
having become an important part, as it acceptable to say tooay, of the
scope of services considered necessary to the existence of the state.
We will ask an unusual Question: whether they buried only
Egyptian Pharaohs in Egypt? There are weighty reasons for
thoughts about this.
The custom of interring rulers in special funerial structures is
characteristic of all the tribes that inhabited Eurasia. In the Steppe
region of the Black Sea, archaeologists for decade after decade have
been excavating earthen burial mounds and have found in these
the graves of leaders of clans and tribes that have disappeared. In
the mountains, where soft earth is lacking, people erected stone
burial tumuli. In Egypt, where the winds can scatter a burial mound
of sand in a few days' time, they found a way around this problem,
erecting, was we sec, burial structures of artificial stone.
What do they represent? At first a structure spread across
Egypt which they latcr called a mastaba On translation from the
Arabic - bench). This is a rectangular, trapezoidal structure that
narrows upward. Thcy buried their tribal leaders and priests in
these. The basic princi pies which determined the location of these
structures had already been formed by then. They were oriented
according to the cardinal directions of the world, which is
connected with primitive beliefs. The people thought just as the
sun rises and sets, so too does man, so if he is placed with his face
or his head to the east or to the west, he will be able to rise from the
dead. Afterwards they also began to orient funeral premises
themselves according to the points of the compass. (V. Avdiev
"History of the Ancient East" ).
A mastaba was a brick superstructure over a burial place
concealed beneath the surface. Beneath the earth was found the
burial chamber with the sarcophagus. A vertical shaft with a depth
from three to thirty meters led into it from above - the entrance.
In part of the superstructure which faces east, in a shallow niche, a
"false door" was built - supposedly the entrance to the mastaba.
A special flat altar stood here on which relatives of the dead laid
offerings and before which they read prayers for the dead.
Sculptured portraits of the dead were kept in a special place (a
serdab). Various artistic images - the life of the dead person in
146
pictures - usually were applied to the walls.
Relatives of the deceased often visited the grave, prayed for him,
and sometimes asked for help from him. The even left him letters.
One Memphis official addressed a letter to his dead wife with a
request that she not torment him. It had been three years since her
death, but he was still not able to forget her and escape his grief.
However, one observance of the rites is not enough for a peaceful
stay in the other world. It is necessary to do battle with evil
spirits, and also to undergo trial beyond the grave. The Book of
the Dead was created for the purpose of helping people to accomplish
this successfully. This book contained a descri ption of how to
avoid all these dangers. Every man was supposed, in the best terms
he could manage, to describe himself in the text which they placed
in his tomb.
Here is what the nomarch (steward) Harkhuf writes in such an
autobiography: "I was excellent... beloved of my father, praised by
my mother, loved by all my brothers. I gave 'bread to the hungry
and clothing to the naked. I was one saying good things and
repeating what was loved. Never did 1 say aught evil to a powerful
one or against any people, (for) 1 desired that it might be well with
me in the great god's presence. Never did 1 judge two brothers in
such a way that a son was deprived of his ancestral inheritance".
Speaking honestly, there is probably little of this that was
true, but the Egyptians thought that it was possible to achieve bliss
by telling lies. At the trial beyond the grave the gods were supposed
to weigh the heart of the dead man and determine how many
good and bad things he had done. In order that the heart should
not able to testify against its master, special magical incantations
were pronounced.
According to Egyptian notions, the trial takes place in the
Hall of the Two Truths (Both Maat). The court meets there, headed
by the great god Ra. The god of the underworld Osiris is present,
and also the 42 supernatural creatures, each of whom is responsible
for a special sin. The dead person delivers a speech in which he
maintains that he has not committed even one of these sins. I-Iereis
an example: "I have not committed sins against men; I have not
been crucl to liVing things; 1 have not attempted to learn that
which has not happened; 1 have not acted fraudulently in the Seat
of Truth; 1 have not defrauded the humble man of his property; 1
have not inflicted pain; 1 have not caused any man to weep; I have
147
not committed murder; I have not given an order for murder to be
committed; I have not carried off the fenkhu cakes offered to the
Spirits; I have not perverted the weights "of the scales".
An eloquent enumeration. You read this and realize that
people do not change over time, except that they no longer offer
cakes to the dead. By the way, according to Russian national
customs people still offer food and pour a cup of vodka to the
dead at the graves of relatives even today.
But how was an Egyptian to cheat the j\ldges? So that they
should not able to catch him in a lie, the dead person pronounced
the names of all 42 creatures, making them unable to oppose him.
Afterwards the gods Thoth and Anubis weighed the heart of the
dead person. If a man committed more good deeds than bad, he
reaches the other world, if the reversc, then the eater of the souls
eats his soul there and then. The social position of a man plays
no role here, only his deeds.
With the strengthening of supreme power, they began to allocate
the grave honors of the rulers to selected others as well. The so-
called stepped pyramids appeared. The most ancient of them is
Joser's pyramid. These are six mastaba placed sidc-by-side. Judgin$.
by the construction of the pyramid, SOme Egyptian architect decided
to fill the spaces between the mastaba in such a way that that the\
pyramid known by now to us resulted. This form is convenient
because difficult calculations are not required during construction
to ensure the structure's stability.
According to the concepts of the ncw chronology, there came a
time in history when this method of burial became attractive 'lOt
only to the Egyptians themselves. At that point they began to
bring the remains of the more famous and esteemed rulers and co·
rulers of the different states, of their confidants and family members
to Egypt in order to commit them to the earth here in particular,
in ground considered holy.
Our ancestors had their reasons for it. In a country where
there is no rain for years, in the dry sands burnt by the sun, remains
are not subject to decomposition. They rot elsewhere, but here
they only dry out untilloss of moisture is complete. Mummified
remains do so especially. They are preserved through the centuries.
So just where else to bury the great of this world if not in Egypt?
Thus the Valley of the Nile became a gigantic cemetery for the
rulers from all the Ecumene.

148
 They brought their remains here, prepared in advance for a
lengthy journey, on special ships,such as the boat displayed in the
Egyptian Museum. The Greek myth of Charon comes to mind
here, of the ferryman of the dead to Hades. He carried departed
souls to the land of the Dead across a certain gigantic river. If
one is to recall that on the medieval maps the seas are portrayed as
rivers, then the conclusion that follows is simple: this is a matter
of sailing across the Mediterranean Sea from Europe to Egypt.
Frequent allusions are encountered in the Bible about the
mysterious city of Eir-Dud - the City of David. It was noticed
that in practically all cases, it is mentioned as a place for the burial
of the Judaic kings. Consequently, the City of David was a huge
necropolis; a royal cemetery. According to Sea ligerian history, its
location is considered utterly lost. But it is not so difficult to
find a huge cemetery complex in the Mediterranean area. It is in
the Valley of the Kings, in Egypt.
Recollections about the king's cemetery of the Empire are
preserved as well in the Greek legend of the Phoenix. As the
"Mythological Dictionary" reports: "The Phoenix is a magical
bird which has the shape of an eagle. It dies, while breathing the
aroma of the grasses, but a new bird is born from the seed of the
Phoenix that takes the body of its father to Egypt, where the priests
of the sun cremate it".
In contrast to the lxxiy of the Phoenix, they did not cremate the
bodies of the kings. Craftsmen for embalming mummies took them in
hand. They were, as we know, good chemists. Preparation of the
sarcophagi was taking place at the same time. And when the time
approached for the concluding stage, they enclosed the king's mtuTImy
in the already prepared or complet<..>d pyramid. That is, they prepared
a grandiose burial vault, but not for a reigning king or pharaoh, who
who was still alive and in good health - who knew how long he
would rule, half a century perhaps! - rather, for that ruler who had
already died and was worthy to rest in holy ground.
Speaking in modern language, a huge funeral bureau operated,
which prepared the pyramid graves beforehand. Naturally, this
was not on a voluntary basis. Each burial excavated yielded solid
riches because there was not a state that would not have wanted
to see its former sovereign off to another world less than as
magnificently as possible. They did not spare money for funerals.

149
 A numerous and well organized caste of priest managed all of
this. According to different estimates, they possessed up to 10
percent of the land being cultivated, and up to 6% of the
population. The right to serve as a priest was hereditary. Each of
the deities had its own clergy (organization), at the head of which
stood a high priest. The numbers, influence and wealth of the
clergy depended on the word of a concrete deity. Thus, the clergy
of An1Un-Ra was the most powerful.
The upper layer of the priesthood were the so-called hem-
netjer - servants of god, the Princi pals of the cult. Then came
the readers and experts of the holy texts. The lower clergy carried
out most diverse, essentially domestic work in the temples. They
were called the Wabu - the pure. Singers and musicians also were
included among the clergy.
The priests possessed the secrets of embalming, performed the
most complex rituals, organized and controlled construction and
managed the services accompanying it. Inasmuch as sizable funds
were arriving, this caste had special people who handled the finances.
A separate team was involved with the inscriptions on the pyramids
and steles that honored the deceased, their achievements in war and
the extents of their conquests. They were call1...J the Cher-Per-Ankh.
Chantepie de la Saussaye reports in "An III ustrated History of
Religion": "A large part of the monuments preserved with
inscriptions found on them ... were dedicated for religious purposes.
From the papyri that have reached us, perhaps nine-tenths are of
religious content... All this material is rather one-sided: in its
origin it is almost entirely concerned with the burial rites that
existed" .
A number of monuments share a common feature: the names of
the interred kings have been effaced on them. For what purpose
was this done? And when? Traditional historians attempt to answer
these questions thus:
In the funcrals of a pharaoh a peculiar jury supposedly was
established. The people decided whether the Pharaoh deserved
burial. If the ruler in life behaved himself unworthily, then they
"deprived" him "of burial". But inasmuch as the tomb was already
prepared, they had to cut away the inscri ption on it and crush the
prepared mummy with a hammer. Thus they erased from the
people's memory the "bad" rulers.

150
 The style of the explanation speaks clearly enough of the time
of its origin. This is the 18-19th century, when the jury appeared.
It is not considered possible to imagine a People's Court in a
slave-holding state. A clumsy tale was born because of a complete
misunderstanding of the real situation in Egypt.
And there are other explanations. Heinrich Brugsch wrote in
"Egypt under the Pharaohs": "Tn a perversion of the historical
truth, the destruction of the monuments which belonged to the
Hyksos, the defacing of their names and titles beyond recognition
and the inscription of their own names and titles on other people's
monuments begins with the ascent to the throne of the kings of the
18 th dynasty".
As we sec, the author thought that this procedure was connected
with the aspiration to exterminate from history the memory itself
of the hated Hyksos. At first glance, it seems rather a convincing
argument. For centuries and down to our own time, in totalitarian
states new rulers, so to speak, "dance on the corpses" of their
predecessors, accusing them of all manner of sins while exalting
themselves. In this case, only the fact that the new pharaohs
inscribed their own names and titles on someone else's monuments
is confusing. Usually they don't do that. They pull down someone
else's monuments.
While doubting the explanations proposed by Heinrich Brugsch,
some historians of taday's formation offer their own variant. They
say that the destruction of the old inscri ptions was started by the
European missionaries or the Egyptologists in the l8-19 th centuries.
They intentionally destroyed the "too glaring traces of original
medieval history that contradict the Scaliger version which already
bad been created in Europe" (Anatoly Fomenko.) And the original
history consists of the fact that "ancient" Egypt was part of a
united Russian-Horde; a Mongolian Ottoman Empire of the 13-l6\h
centuries. The author adheres to the opinion that the worldwide
empire of the Middle Ages was created by Russians, who had spread
their power throughout all of Eurasia. After the break-up of the
empire "in Europe... memories of the Great Mongol conquest of the
14 th century and of the Great Mongol empire were already erased to
a significant degree". Afterwards Egypt's turn arrived. Here the
names and titles were destroyed that had testified to the Russian
origin of the empire's rulers who were buried in the holy ground.

151
 The hypothesis dictated the aspiration to find the Russian
roots of all Eurasia's medieval history. Such an approach, in our
view, is unproductive. If nothing else because the formation of
nations in the modern sense of this word began essentially later.
He does not make clear for that same hypothesis the second
part of the problem: if the European missionaries and Egyptologists
who visited Egypt first destroyed the names of "Russian" pharaohs,
then who inscribed the new names of the rulers? Was it really the
missionaries, too?
The explanation, in our view, is somewhat simpler and
ordinary. The priests themselves perpetrated the procedure of
renaming the monuments. There arc comparatively few pyramids
and similar burial vaults (there are nearly 80 pyramids), but the
deceased are many. How many of the old rulers there were, no one
remembered any longer, inasmuch as not only did they themselves
sink into oblivion, but also their dynasties, and in some cases even
the states which tbey at some time had headed. This means then
became possible to make use of their final resting places for their
own recently deceased there. It was quick and cheap. One does
not have to build new pyramids, <lOd this is a great savings for the
priestly treasury.
And there is no reason to stand on ceremony with the former
owners of the burial vaults. Jorge Livraga in the book ''Thebes''
cites such facts as these: "During the 21~ and 22 00 dynasties the
mummies of Sekcnenre, Ahmose, Amenhotep J. Thutmose I, Thutmose
II. Thutmose III, Seti I, Ramses II, Ramscs Ill, some of Amun's priests
and a number of otherswe have not been able to identify were re-
interred together.
"In the grave of Amenhotep II, besides h1m personally were
found the mummies of Thutmose IV, Amenhotep III, Merenptah
and Siptah. Seti II, Ramses IV. Ramses VI. Queen Tiye, and also
two women and a child.
"They also began to use small lateral chambers or chapels for
concealing the rich offerings, as in the tomb of Amenhotep II, where
the researcher Loret discovered and photographed several mummies
which were simply piled up. Most likely, we will never find out
the reason for such extreme haste or the persecutions and crimes
that preceded it".
It is difficult for Jorge Livraga to imagine that the priests were

152
treating the respected dead disrespectfully. In his opinion, criminals
had been operating here. They had taken the gold and valuables
from the mummies and cast them aside. Doubtful. There is no
reason for the robbers to have moved the ransacked remains. To
take trouble with them is only to lose time.
There is one more version among the traditionalist
Egyptologists: the priests had re-hidden the mummies, saving them
from thieves and robbers. Also unconvincing. In order to re-hide
the mummies it was not necessary to dump them like firewood
before abandoning them to the ages.
In our time a hypothesis has appeared according to which the
priests in extreme haste hid the mummies - not from thieves, but
from the troops of Napoleon who was invading Egypt at the end of
the 18lh century. This hypothesis raises many questions that have
no answers.
By the time of Napoleon's invasion, the country had long
ceased to be heathen and the castes of priests no longer exjsted.
Islam was in force herc, which, in princi pie, prohibited any
representation of people and animals (we recall how many pictures
arc on the walls of the temples and pyramids!) and which,
additionally, has its own method of burying thc deceased. The
religious structures of the ancestors found themselves abandoned
and partially covered with sand. Who built them and for what
reason, the overwhelming majority of the population did not
know. Only the grave robbers, who pilfered from the burial places
everything that was of any value, gravitated to the pyramids and
temples. Just who then hid the mummies?
To recapitulate: the various names on many inscri ptions were
chiseled-away painstakingly by someone. The most natural
hypothesis is the priests themselves often did this. inasmuch as
the remains of kings were being brought together from throughout
the Ecumene, a situation unavoidably arose when rulers ended up
beside each other who during their lives had been at bitter odds
with each other. How would it be if the victories of one of them
were celebrated over the other on the steles ? In order not to lose
clientele, the removal of memorials at their triumphs from the steles
of the victors follows natural [y.
BlIt not only the priests had their hands in this. The original
inscri ptions violently disturbed those people who in particular at

153
this time (the 18th century) were creating, or more precisely. contriving
Egyptian history. So. a lengthy list of cities conquered by the Pharaoh
Thutmose III is cited in the well-known Karnak inscri ption. And
in some places the names of the cities have been destroyed.
That there were Egyptologists who intentionally destroyed
evidence of the youth of the pyramids and various finds in Egypt
there is no doubt. A desire to bring these finds into agreement
with the Scaligerian chronology ruled them. They sincerely
believed that "they were correcting" mistaken history. And when
inscri ptions or papyri reached them in which names were present
that were characteristic of the Middle Ages, not of ancient times,
they dismissed them as gross errors or chance artifacts and
consigned them to destruction.
And there were other motivations for such behavior.
According to the evidence of the historian Nikolai Morozov, in
Basil's book, "A Russian Seaman's Trip trough Egypt, Syria and
the Greek Archipelago", publisbed in the '40s of the 19th century,
the author tells that. when he visited the tombs and buildings
described by the famous French Egyptologist Jean-Francois
Champollion, he did not find even a trace of the many drawings
cited by him. The Arab accompanying him explained: Charnpollion
himself obliterated them. Why? So that his books, Champollion's
books, remained the only document for later researchers and people
would not be able to manage without them. (Or, dispute them n.
There is direct evidence of this by witnesses who in fact caught
Champollion red-handed as he was destroying the finds. In the
book, "Tragedy of the Pyramids", Peter Ellebrakht reports about a
visit to Egypt by the architect Hessemer: "It is very unfortunate
that I arrived in Thebes immediately after Champollion" ... The
Darmstadt architect Fritz Max Hessemer sent this distressing news
to his patron, the di plomat and collector Georg August Kestner
who had founded the German Archaeological Institute in Rome:
"I honor Champollion's scholarshi p in every way possible,
however, I should say that as a man he manifests a disposition that
discredits him extremely in the eyes of people! The tomb found by
Belconi in Thebes was one of the best; at least it was fully preserved
and not damaged anywhere.
"But now, because of Champo!lion, the best things in it have
been destroyed. The fine, natural size frescos lie broken on the ground ...

154
He who has seen this tomb before will not be able to recognize it now.
I was extremely angry when I saw such sacrilege".
Champollion explained it all by the fact that he wanted to
take the pictures to France, tried to cut them out, but it turned out
to be impossible to cut the stone and everything was damaged. A
doubtful explanation, unacceptable for a genuine scientist. But
knowing with which scale Champollion's predecessors forged and
altered historical documents while "validating" the Scaligerian
historiography, one is not surprised by the Egyptologist's actions.
He operated according to the traditions of that time.
It is well known that they fired Napoleon's cannon point
blank at the famous Sphinx in Giza and badly damaged its face.
Ollt of ignorance? For entertainment? Hardly. A whole staff of
learned Egyptologists was in Napoleon's forces. Napoleon himself
said that he had come here to "help Egypt into the world." He
charged draftsmen to capture 00 paper all the structures and
remains of the monuments. "In Deodera he acted as no other
conqueror, either before or after him: he left a precise copy of a
large stone with a depiction of a Zodiac instead of the real one,
which was taken to Paris" (Jorge Livraga). And nonetheless his
cannoneers shot up the Sphinx.
The artillery rounds also corrected history. They wi ped off
the face of the Sphinx some kind of symbolism which contradicted
the Scaligerian chronology. Unfortunately, we will never learn
precisely what in particular. The opinion exists that it may have
been a cross which was completely out of place, in the opinion of
the traditionalists, on a sculpture of such millennial antiquity.
Most likely that was it. A cross on the Sphinx in all likelihood
so contradicted notions about Egypt that they shot it away to
rid the world of it. Everyone "knew" that the cross was a
Christian symbol!
The catch, however. was that the cross existed as a rei igious
symbol in the East for a long time before Christ. We will dwell on
this in detail later. For the time being we shall emphasize that the
cross in particular is the most important attribute of the sun god
Ra. They call it the Coptic cross with an ear in Christian times.
A schematic depiction itself of the sun on many monuments
also is a cross. It is not surprising therefore that Egypt even in the
traditional history is considered now a veritable "country of

155
crosses". But only not Christian. Napoleon's Egyptologists still
didn't know this, they only had begun to study Egypt; after they
had disfigured the Sphinx. Fortunately for history, they did not
see the crosses on the Colossi of Memnon, and on dozens of drawings,
bas-reliefs and monuments. They did not find the necklace from
the tomb of the pharaoh Tutankhamen with four crosses and his
Iinen shirt with embroidery that depicted a cross worn next to
the skin ... Otherwise their "correction" of history would have
been even more catastrophic.

Modem photographies: Colossi of Memnon with crosses.

From top to bottom:

I.Copfs crosses.
2. Unen shirl with cross of the pharaoh Tutankhamen. And glove of the
pharaoh. Gloves were spreading widely on middle ages.
3. Cross of the phsf1Ioh Tutsnkhamen.

156
 Even the Egyptians themselves "corrected" the past. It is known
that the large pyramids were faced. On the peak of the Great Pyramid
even today the remains of the facing have been preserved. Its
dismantling, according to the teslimony of European travelers, took
place on order of the sultans in that era when Islam became the
predominate religion. As early as the middle of the 16th century, the
secretary of the French embassy in Egypt, Jean Cheneau, noted that
there was a facing. The third pyramid generally was intact, "as if it
were just erected". But they removed the slabs of the facings in
precious few years. The break between islam and Christianity had
become so profound, that the crosses that were depicted on them
became offensive for the Moslems.

Medieval evidence has bccn preserved that on the facing of

the pyramids at some time there were extensive inscri ptions in
different languages. Here are some lines from Jean-Phili ppe Lauer's
book, "Mysteries of the Egyptian Pyramids." The Baghdad
phYSiCian, Abd ai-Latif reported: "The stones were covered with
ancient writing which no one remembers any longer ... There were
many such inscri ptions here such that, if the desire to copy even
those which are found on the surface of two pyramids arose, then it
would have taken more than ten thousand pages."
"Abu Mashar Jafar reported about seven types of inscri ptiollS:
in the Greek, Arabic, Syrian, Musnad, Himyaritic (or ancient Hebrew,
according to the manuscri pts), Latin and Persian languages".
Arabic inscri ptions have also been discovered inside the pyramids,
for example, on the western wall of the burial chamber of the pyramid
of Chephren and in the fifth pyramid· on the plastering covering its
southern wall. This is from the 14-Hi'h centuries, the time of the origin
157
of Arabic culture. More evidence of the youth of the pyramids.
The latest evidence in time of the youth of the Egyptian pyramids
was received very recently. In 1992, a Russian specialist on forensic
medicine, Svetlana Balabanova, analyzed Egyptian mummies. She
analysed specimens of hair, skin and bone with which forensic
medicine experts constantly are involved, unmasking killers and
helping establish the identity of their victims. (A. Yolk "The
Pharaohs Snorted Cocaine". "Ogollek" magazine, No. 32,2003).
A mummy lying in front of Balahanova was a very solid, if one
is to believe the traditional chronology, three thousand years old.
The man had died supposedly during the time of the 21st Egyptian
dynasty. However, results of the analysis rocked the world: in his
body, she found traces of tobacco, hashish and cocaine!
Having studied the mummies of eight more Egyptians who
lived in the period from 1070 B.c. through 395 A.D., Balabanova
also discovered traces of tobacco, hashish and cocaine in them.
This discovery was like an exploding bomb. The native land of the
huge, two-three meters high, evergreen cocaine plants is the
mountainous tropical forests of South America. Tobacco also is
from America ... How did it get to Africa 1,500 years before
Columbus?
The results of Balabanova's research struck at the core belief of
historical science. Therefore, they swamped Balabanova with
letters. Their authors were indignant, distressed, and scoffed.
"All your investigations are complete nonsense, because before the
sailing of Columbus, it was impossible to encounter tobacco and
cokai.ne in any country of the Old World", - This is the gentlest
respionse the expert happened to read.
However, later it was demonstrated that Balabanova had not
been mistaken. German scientists studied an Egyptian mummy
which was kept in one of Munich's museums (it is supposedly 3,000
years old). And again there was found a collection of vegetable
substances well known in our time: nicotine, hashish and cocaine.
Well, with opium everything is understood! The poppy grows
in the Old World. But how can it be with "American
impregnations" into the bodies of Egyptians? Wben the first shock
from the discoveries passed, they recalled that facts similar to
those found by Balabanova and her other colleagues have been
known for about a hundred years! They bad simply managed to
ignore them. In 1922, when the tomb of Tutankhamen was unearthed,
158
they found in it not only "the gold of the Pharaohs", but also the
dried up tiny body of a tobacco beetlc.
In 1976, while studying the mummy of Ramses II, French
scientists found not only tobacco beetles, but also bits of tobacco.
Naturally, there and then, as is customary, the objections began to
rain down: "Most likely one of the archaeologists, while studying
the tomb, accidentally spilled the tobacco". However, this excuse
does not explain anything. They found samples of the things
supposedly unknown to the Egyptians even beneath the resin layer
which was laid down during the original embalming. It is
impossible to spill tobacco there by accident. Moreover, these things
were additionally found in the mummy's abdominal cavity!
It is known that tobacco has good germicidal properties - it
protects against decay. Therefore, the Egyptians used it in
mummification and fumigated the premises with it. It is possible
that the Egyptians even smoked tobacco themselves. In the outskirts
of Giz<l they discovered clay pi pes which are dated by the
traditional chronology to 2000 - 1700 B.C.
Inasmuch as the Egyptologists of the old school stubbornly
ignore these strange discoveries, they have to contrive the most
unnatural explanations. Thus, the German researcher Renata
Hermer has thought that they unwrapped and examined the mummy
of Ramses II certainly as early as the 19th century: "And just then
the tobacco fell inside the mummy aCCidentally".

There are even more likely versions. Nicotine is contained not

only in American tobacco, but also in some pl<lllts of the Old
World. The majority of scientists think that the traces of nicotine

159
in the mummies and pyramids have this as their origin, and nothing
to do with tobacco.
But how can it be with the cocaine? Perhaps it too came to
the Egyptians not from America, but from some other plant? As of
today, only two types of the three hundred representatives of the
Erythroxylaceae family are known which contain some noticeable
quantity of the cocaine alkaloid. These are Erythroxylum coca and
Erylhroxylum novogranatense. Both grow only in South America.
Searching for the answer to these questions, historians have
recalled various hypotheses which are connected with a sojourn
of Egyptians in the New World. As early as 1910, archaeologists,
discussing the stepped pyramids of Mexico, came to the conclusion
that, possibly, their construction had not been an invention of the
American Indians. They adopted this technology in Egypt. The
similarity is very great: the design of the pyramids, the custom of
burying the deceased in them, worshi p of a sun god, a precise
knowledge of mathematics and astronomy (the latter was necessary
(or sea captains, who were preparing to start on a long journey).
Evaluating all these parallels, the scientists came to the conclusion
that civilization was born ill Egypt and spread from there to all
tile other regions of the planet.
Thus appeared the Diffusionist school (from the word
"diffusion" - spreading, mixing and penetration). Their opponents,
who maintain that no communication between Africa and South
America was possible, have received the name "isolationists".
Since it is asking too much of them to cast doubt on the
traditional chronology, historians incline to the opinion that the
real capabilities of ancient Egypt were somewhat above those with
which they are credited. They even al10w that three thousand
years ago Egyptian seafarers sailed both to India and to China.
On what they sailed does not interest them. Evidence of the fact
is not taken into account that three millennia ago there were no
technologies and instruments which allowed bUilding sea vessels,
that these technologies arose only with the appearance of iron, and
that this was during the Middle Ages. Historians are prepared to
agree with anything prOVided that the existing time scale be kept
inviolate. Meanwhile, today medical investigations of mummies
found in Nubia show that 80 percent of the people found there
also used cocaine! How can this be?

160
"DARK AGES"
AND NOMADS CHAPTER NINE

Traditional history resembles classical dramas in places. In

them, as is known, it is obligatory to have evildoers and culprits
behind all misfortunes and adversities.
There are also very bad people in the Scaligerian chronology,
because of whom there came to be "Dark Ages" in the official histories
of practically all states and peoples known to us.
Voids in the chronology are denoted by this term. As we have
already said, its compilers artificially extended the antiquity of
both the states and the ruling dynasties. As a result, periods of
several hundred years were created which had to be filled with
some kind of events, facts and names. What resulted was antiquity
(on paper), but nothing of any importance that happened in it!
Such was impossible in real history. Therefore, the chronologists
explained that the "dark" periods are the result of catastrophes in
the various states.
And right here the immediate family of lago appears on the
historical scene. Historians called them the culprits for the fall of
"ancient" Rome, the centuries-long lag of Russia behind her
European neighbors and chronic failures in the development of
China. The evildoers smashed the fates of states and people,
forcing them to forget about their fine pasts and about the eminence
in science and art which they had supposedly achieved in
antiquity. Because of these black deeds, the peoples of Europe and
Russia lived for hundreds of years in poverty and neglect. Only
in the Renaissance did Europe, for example, perk up for some reason,
at the same time recalling in detail the customs and traditions of
its radiant past and starting to develop once more, freed from the
evil·doers who had sunk into oblivion without any trace.
The culprits of the misfortunes and adversities are called
nomads. They have the most diverse names and they operate
(according to Scaligerian history) in the most unlikely centuries.

16 t
What is characteristic about them in the overall picture of their
appearance and disappearance on the pages of the books is always
one and the same: nomadic hordes suddenly, like a tornado, fly at
flourishing countries, rout their armies, destroy the states utterly
and then suddenly disappear, leaving after them wreckage, charred
ruins, and desolation, to overcome which centuries are necessary.
These centuries also are called "dark" ones.
The most characteristic example in the Egyptian history are the
hordes of nomads who in 1786 H.C. invaded the country and ruled
in it, according to various estimates, either Ito or 200 years. The time
of their rule is regarded <15 the "dark perioo of Egyptian history".
"All their people assumed the name Hyksos, that is "shepherd
kings," wrote Heinrich Brugsch.
Josephus Flavius specified: "According to the assertion of some
manuscri pts, these were nomadic Arabs, but, according the assertion
of others, shepherds that were taken into captivity".
The impression is created that some kind of glitch happened in
Egyptology. Because either version, in our view, is absurd: foreign
shepherds, even taken into captivity, became the pharaohs and ruled
for two hundred years ! How ? The historians do not bother to
explain. As one of the critics of Scaligerian history Wittily remarked,
one had to search whether there are tailor kings or draymen kings in
"ancient" Egypt since it already h<15 shepherds. (Nikolai Morozov).
However, all of this is accepted by Egyptologists quite seriously:
"According to the Manetho legend ... at some time a wild and
coarse people, who arrived from the east, inundated the lowlands
with their hordes, fell upon the native kings sitting in their own
cities and seized control of all the country, not having met strong
opposition from the Egyptians... Then they made one of their number
king; his name was Satatin or Sallis, also Silitis... Coming across
in the Sethroite region the city Avaris, he built it up, fortified it
with extremely strong walls and brought into it 240,00 heavily
armed troops who were obliged to make up his garrison".
According to Brugsch, the country from which the Hyksos had
arrived was called in various languages Syria, the Rutennu of the
East, Asher and Meti. Commenting on reports of Rutennu shepherds
in one of the inscri ptions,an Egyptologist writes that this expression
contains an allusion to "from where the shepherd kings who
controlled Egypt came". One also may consider the name of the

162
capital - Avaris - as evidence of the Eastern European roots of the
Hyksos. The Avars, according to the encyclopedic dictionaries, are a
"tribal union, primarily of Turkic speaki.ng tribes... In the 6th century
they formed the Avar kaganate in the Danube basin".
In the 6th century A.D. But what kind of a relationship do
they have to the Hyksos who supposedly attacked Egypt in 1786
B.C? The most straightforward seems strange in our opinion.
Everything that is ascribed to the Hyksos as a matter of fact occurred
in the early Middle Ages, and then was replicated broadly by the
efforts of the Sealigerian historians and sent off into "antiquity".
. Other nomads are recalled in this connection who also were
in Egypt. That was the period when the famous Pharaohs ruled.
The best known of them is Ramesses H, or Ramses. The name, by
the way, is very similar to Rome-Jesus. But this is an aSide. So,
there was a war in that epoch, in the opinion of the traditionalists,
against the forces of the great Hittite, or Hettite people. As Heinrich
Brugsch wrote:
"The Egyptian inscri ptions call them the "Great People" or
"Great Land".
Traces of the Hittites supposedly were discovered for the first
time in Asia Minor in 1880. Professor Archibald Sayee and
afterwards William Wright, relying on the Bible, suggested
considering an area north of Palestine as the "land of the ancient
Hittites". Some of the finds discovered here were ascribed to them
in particular. They began to recognize as monuments of their culture
the bas-reliefs with large-nosed, stocky people in pointed caps and
boots with toes turned upwards. They had emblems of a winged
solar disk and snake as did the Egyptians, and also a double eagle,
as the Byzantines, a double-bitted poleaxe and Winged gods.
However, comparatively recently the existence of the Hittites
in that form in which tbey figure in Scaligerian history has been
placed in doubt. Investigations of tbe south Russian burial mounds
which belong to the 1O·12tb centuries of our own era, have led to
yhe discovery of objects of the very same type as those in Asia
Minor. They were found in other regions which border on the
Black Sea as well. So, who then lived here: Hittites or ancestors
of the present peoples? But perhaps the Hittites are also the
descendants of the present peoples?
The questions, as you see, are pointed. And the adherents of

163
the Scaliger history had either to reject previous views or contrive
some kind of version which explained the new facts. And they
contrived one: "The influence of the Hittite culture was sufficiently
powerful to manifest itself across a great distance... long after the
state and the people that created it had passed into eternity".
As we sec, not only the Hyksos, but also the Hittites rendered
an influence on the descendants both for a thousand and for two
thousand years. There is no reason to say that such a version does
not invite criticism.
But let us return to the I-Iyksos. They have one distinguishing
feature. Besides being shepherd kings, they are on horseback. In
one of the books on Egypt we find:
"The Egyptians of course had no reason to thank the Asiatic
newcomers. But nevertheless they gave Egypt a valuable gift: they
brought horses there. Until their arrival, this king of domestic
animals was not known in the Nile Valley. There are as many
donkeys portrayed on the monuments as you like that were used
for all sorts of agricultural jobs, but of horses· not one... The
horse soon was established and began to be bred" (Z. Rogozina).
Everything is correct: the new-comers traveled on horses and,
arriving in Egypt and Asia Minor, established there the culture of
horse·breeding. But when it happened, and whether they were
Asiatics, we will look into a bit later.
Right now - about the nomads in the history of "ancient"
Rome. Here they also proved themselves to be awful evil·doers.
Their raids have been described with details that freeze the soul.
The most gentle epithets of the "ancient" and Byzantine authors
for the nomads: "fierce", "wild", "Danube wolves".
They reach Thrace, ... "real men of Mars... swords alway~ at the
ready", reports an alarmed Ovid. As early as 16 A.D., the Sarmatians
cross the Danube in masses. Rome SliCCeedS in dealing with them
only with great difficulty. The Sarmatians invade in jolts as it were
in 35~37, 49-50, and 68-70. In 80~92, the emperor Oomitian wages
exhausting wars with the Sarmatians in Dacia. Roman authorities
try first to defeat the individual Sarmatian tribes one at a time, then
to payoff their leaders or tame them with money, gift..o; and honors.
They settle the Sarmatians on empire territory· as a defense against
the next invasions by the next nomads from the cast. Broadly speaking,
this is the situation on the lower Danube in the first century.

164
 It gets worse and worse as it goes on, After a few centuries is
the invasion of the Huns. Having shattered the Alans, they
afterward pounce on the Goths and eject them from the Black Sea
Steppe, From that time the headquarters of the Hun "king" Rua
(Rugila) also travels around here. From 425, the Huns start active
wars on the Danube; from 445, AttiJa becomes their leader. In
Rome they called him "the Scourge of God", the cursed Hun was so
threatening although an analysis of the leader's name made by
linguists concludes that Attila is simply "old chap",

The relief on "The Copper from Gunderstrup·,

Despite the loud praise that has remained over the centuries,
Attila as a man and military leader is completely unknown. Here
is how they describe him: "Malicious, treacherous, stunted, with a
broad chest, a huge head, a thin beard, a flat nose and a disgusting
yellow face, with flabby, limp skin", This is not a portrait, but a
caricature, composed by a not very talented writer,
As regards the military le;,\dershi I' capabilities of the leader of
the I-Iuns, then, as the historians write, "not one account of the
battles has reached us, therefore, we cannot evaluate Attila's military
leadership.. , Those, who buried him and hid the treasures, were
murdered by the Huns so that no one would be able to find Attila's
grave". That is, it is even unknown where his grave is! There is the
name, there is the legend, and there is nothing more.
Ammian Marcellin provides a group portrait of the Huns:,
"The Hun tribes .. , exceed any measure of savagery", They, "as
it were adhere to their own horses, sturdy but ugly in form,
devoid of any beauty, like eunuchs. They all are distinguished
by solidly built and strong members, thick necks, and in general
such a monstrous and fearsome look that one can take them for
165
two-legged animals or liken them to posts.
Unpleasant in appearance, they are savage and perpetual
fugitives, spending their whole lives in nomad tents in which
their filthy women weave their pitiful clothing... Their one passion
in life is the insatiable craving for plunder".
Real monsters were ravaging Europe. They are described very
emotionally. But let us draw away "from the emotions and try to
determine from where they appeared.
Traditional history shows precisely: they all were rolling into
Europe from Central Asia. Countless hordes of conquerors came from
there in wave after wave. In which connection, not one horde, neither
the Hyksos, nor the Huns, ever returned to their home territories. A
new horde stepped into the arena of history the next time. But how
did they originate? What gigantic generator of nomadic hordes
operated for centuries in Central Asia? (Yaroslav Kesler).
And to where did they disappear in the Middle Ages? Here
there is total silence by the traditional historiography.
In order to explain it, the scientists by our time set about
studying the contemporary inhabitants of the steppes and deserts
of Central Asia. After all, they are the direct descendants of the
"conquerors." If so, then at least some kind of traces of the by-gone
centuries should have remained in their lives. Therefore, the
adherents of the new chronology also have undertaken such a study.
And here it has been determined that the lands in question cannot
now and never could feed such a number of nomads. Life in the
deserts is extremely severe. It is impossible here to support the
huge herds of cattle and horses necessary for "countless hordes".
It also has been determined that Mongolian cattlemen never
had huge cities. They were not involved with industrial production
sufficient for the production of military equi pmcnt. Neither in the
past nor in the prescnt did they have even the experience of the
formation of huge military units and the waging of full-scale war.
But, you see, it is acceptable to think that the cattle-raising
tribes and the Mongolian tribal clans somehow united before the
campaign, selected a single military leader and went to sack nearby
and distant neighbors while submitting to the strictest of military
disci pline. Can it have been so?
The researchers analyzed the typical behavior of the tribes,
both nomadic and settled, in different parts of the world. It turned

166
out that, as a rule, they never unite when they carry out offensive
military operations. Each tribe acts on its own initiative, not
wishing to divide possible spoil with anyone.
They behave exactly the same way in the face of a common
danger. The behavior in this regard of the native tribes of North
and South America in the epoch of the Spanish, Portuguese and
English incursions onto the continent was identical. In the initial
stages there was not one case when the tribes ever united to repulse
a common enemy. Each defended its own territory. When this
effort failed, it simply left the place where it had lived and shifted
for itself as best it could; its neighbors watched this happen with
complete passivity.
Although half a planet separates America from Asia, the Asian
tribes were in no way different and are no different in this from
the American. In Afghanistan, where a wasting war has been
ongoing for many decades against foreigners, the tribes involved
have most valiantly, consistently and uncompromisingly fought
only on their own territories. As soon as the battles shift to
another area, their military zeal practically disappears.
The reason for such behavior, in our view, lies in the fact that the
tribes had no notion of a "common motherland" or a "common state".
They have no COllllllon territory. Nothing ullites them; even their
languages and beliefs in many cases are different (America and
Afghanistan). Therefore, they do not see any sense in rallying, in the
creation of a unified mHitary and state structures without which it is
senseless to wage wars, in particular, offensive wars. They are (not
without good reason) of the opinion that any state structure, especially
a military one, will curtail and even destroy their tribal laws and
liberties. We have no basis to think that the cattle-raising tribes and
Mongolian tribal clans conducted themselves otherwise.
Trying nonetheless somehow to explain why the Mongols
supposedly at some time united and went on to conquer Europe,
some traditional historians express the supposition that it happened
biologically. Under the influence of nature, including the cosmos,
a people's stereotypical behavior changes radically. True, all do
not change; such changes affect the most emotional. A mutation
occurs in them· they become passionate people.
Their numbers are trifling, but they create ethnic systems owing
to their abundant energy. Distinguished, passionate peoples possess

167
fine organizational talents and the ability to allure masses of people
behind them. "They struggle for the conquest of peoples who
surround their ethnos or, on the other hand, battle against the
conquerors" ... "Passion develops an irresistible internal drive for
a single-minded activity." (Lev Nikolayevich Gumilev
"Ethnogenisis and the Biosphere of the Earth". Leningrad, 1989).
Speaking more simply, the cosmos is to blame for this. Some
kind of cosmic rays so influenced the Mongols that they cast
away their flocks and went off to conquer the world. But, when
their passionate leaders left for another world, the zeal of the
conquerors died away and they returned to their sheep. But the
passion itself did not disappear. In campaigns through Asia and
Europe, the Mongols became close friends with the local women
and, so to speak, by a sexual route they spread it among the peoples
of the world, inasmuch as this quality is passed to children. (Lev
Nikolayevich Gumilev. , K.P. Ivanov "Ethnosphere and Cosmos".
Leningrad. 1988).
A very convenient hypothesis. It answers two questions at
once: It becomes clear from where so many conquerors appeared in
Europe and Asia in the subsequent centuries. And at the same time
why those achievements which the traditionalists ascribe to their
ancestors are in no way reflected in the life of today's Mongols,
Altays, Buryats, and other peoples of Central Asia. There is no
more passion! The cosmos for some reason stopped irradiating them,
so they lapsed again into their primitive condition. Hence, it is
necessary to send all claims to the Universe.
We will not be sending anything anywhere, because we think
that the passion theory is unscientific. It is possible to assume any
other wide-scale phenomenon of nature as the basis of logical
constructions with the equal success. Let us suppose, an earthquake.
We can announce that it so strongly shook the Mongols that the
most emotional of them became passionate people. A hypothesis in
no way worse than Lev Gumilev's has will result.
In our view, the pursuits of Lev Gumilev and his followers
were doomed to failure from the beginning. Staying within the
framework of the Scaligerian history, they were not even able to
imagine that, as a matter of fact, there never were any such incursions
by Asiatic nomads. The gigantic generator of nomadic hordes in
Central Asia did not exist.

168
 Where did these hordes come from? From nowhere, the
adherents of the new chronology think. Conquerors didn't have
to rush into Europe from Asia across thousands of kilometers.
Those they call nomads, barbarians and wild horsemen in the
traditional historiography, lived right here, in the different corners
of the European continent. And they didn't live exactly as the
writers of history describe them.
The Ukrainian archaeologist, Andrei Dobrolyubsky, one of the
leading specialists on the problems of the ancient Northern Black
Sea area, notes that the great mass of "nomadic antiquities of this
region came into scientific circulation comparatively recently;
approximately in the last two or three decades". Neither Scaliger
nor his followers, naturally, "were able to know about these
materials." However, the archaeologists themselves have tied them
to the generally accepted chronological scheme that also is fully
natural - another scheme that never actually existed.
Having done this, the following has resulted.
If one tries to recreate the Pecheneg-Torchesk and Polovets
societies of the 10th century according to the data of the funeral
rite (that is, according to the rules of reconstruction generally
accepted in archaeology), then it will turn out that these consish,>d
only of warrior horsemen and had neither women nor an elite.
This society - horsemen, who are accompanied by beggarly crowds
- moved from place to place without check throughout the steppes
of the Black Sea area, not leaVing behind themselves any
archaeological traces other than individual graves. They generally
didn't use crockery. Such, in a general way, is the appearance of
the "late-nomadic" family. One need say that it conforms to our
everyday notion of "savage" nomadic hordes which the written
tradition has brought to us.
But the Sarmatian-Alan family, itself no less "savage" but
belonging to the 13-14th centuries, is similar in everything else
but does not conform. According to those same formal features of
ritual, the Sarmatians and Alans did not ride horses, and only
used them rarely as sacrificial food. But they had a multitude of
nobles and women, including even the vcry rich. They all ate and
drank from rich and diverse crockery.
It hardly is necessary to add that there are no societies of the
types described. rf, paying no attention to the traditional dating,

169
one combines them into a single whole, then we see a completely
normal society of nomads. Here both men and women and chi Iclren
have a social structure with le,J(!ers, priests and military leaders
with an established way of life and culture.

. I
The costume of nomad's tsarina. The Stout burial ground. (Klocko S. t99I.Aw.b)

Before us is a single chronological array of monuments. This,

in turn, can indicate that all the monuments accepted by us as
being "ancient" belong in the 13-14th centuries.
The single most fundamental question of the modern
historiography - the validity of its dating· here arises in all its
magnitude.
As soon as the generally accepted chronology is accepted, lapses
appear instantly - "nomadic epochs" exactly like the "dark ages" in
Europe. If the Scythian-Sarmatian epoch (the reference model) is
viewed as having been filled with corresponding monuments rather
evenly, then, beginning with the end of the 4th century A.D.
numerous burials of nomads in the Black Sea area suddenly
disappear. Later on, from approximately the turn of the 9th-10th
centuries. they just as suddenly appear again - and in considerable
numbers. They continue to exist in multitudes all the way up to
the middle of the 14th century. After this they disappear again.
Forever.
Thus. with the formal spread across the "reference" of nomadic
antiquities according to the generally accepted chronological
scheme, two large temporal breaks are formed.
One of them, the 5-9th centuries inclusive, correlates with the
epoch of the Great Migration of Peoples. It is thoroughly
highlighted in the written sources. Up until then the impression

170
i~created that the steppe was overcrowded with nomadic hordes.
If one is to believe the "ancient" authors, who were writing much
about the tribes of the Black Sea area, the Cimmerians, Scythians,
Agathirs, Gelons, Meots, lssedones, Uzy, Huns, Khazars, Tavrs,
Scythian Tavrs, Hyperboreans, Galats, Cumans, Vlach, Ros, Daci,
Getae, Arimaspi, Issedi and others all settled the expanses of the
steppe at the same time. A complete and utter Babylon.
But, at the same time again, "no classification contrivances allow
us to single out convincingly the burials of the Huns, Avars, nomadic
Bolgars or Hungarians and the like. Nothing results. It is a fact:
there are no such monuments for the area northwest of the Black Sea",
Andrei Dobrolyubsky declares decisively. And, most charat,i:eristically,
none of the adherent specialists of the traditional historiography will
argue with him. There is nothing to argue about: There really are no
monuments. Therefore, they avoid his conclusions with silence.
Archaeologists don't even attempt to explain another temporal
break (from the middle of the 14·16th centuries and beyond.) In
addition, it is thought for some reason that competence in
archaeology where this time is concerned is coming to an end. It
is enough to glance at any textbook of archaeology in order to be
convinced: materials after the 14th century are stopping.
We shall emphasize again: Andrei Dobrolyubsky says that
temporal breaks are formed only in an attempt to correlate finds
with the Scaligerian chronology. In accordance then with the
new chronology, all archaeological monuments of the steppes
between the Southern Bug and the Danube, starting with
Cimmerian time, "in princi pie should be shifted to our millennium
in the chronological range after the 10th century". (Andrei
Dobrolyubsky. "The Great People's Degeneration").
The "nomads", it turns out, lived in cities, or as it is acceptable
to call them, "sites of ancient settlements". The settlements dot the
expanses of Eurasia. They smelted and processed metal in these
settlements, made ceramics and cloth and traded actively. It is
acknowlegcd in modern history textbooks that Attica rcceivt,>d half
of the grain it needed from the Scythians via the Bosporan Kingdom
• the same Scythians who are considered inveterate nomads.
This means that, allegedly wandering from place to place in
search of pastures for cattle, they managed to master agriculture,
labor productivity and market the grain they were growing, all at

171
 TIle IlllCient calendar on the bronz' mirroc
"Nomads" had a complicated philosophical system about the OIigin of our World.

the same time. They mastered it it to such a level that they sold
their surplus grain to their enemies.
Numerous artifacts allow us to say that the "nomads" acheived
a degree of development in mining and metellurgy fully sufficient
for them to have produced the various articles they are known to
have used, including first class armament. Gold articles found in
Scythian burial mounds are masterpieces of the jeweler's skill without
equals in the world during their time. And these people created
all this without ever getting down out of their saddles?
So thinks the traditional historiography in particular. The
term "nomadic feudalism" even has been thought up for the
nomads. The Scythians and Sarmat, Pechenegs and Polovets, Alans
and Huns, not to even mention the Mongols· all of them
supposedly lived in mobile states without capitals, without state
structures and without their own written culture. (A. Podoynitsyn
"On Nomadic Feudalism, Nomadic Cities and Nomads". "A
Reconstruction of Universal History", page 563).
The question of a written language is especially important.
Even very recently the mooern descendants of the ancient nomads
more often than not did not have a written language. They
communicated all their legends and stories from generation to
generation only orally all the way down to the 20th century. A
written language appeared for the Buryats, Mongols, Khirghiz, and
Altai only in the thirties of the last century based on the Slavic
CyrilliC alphabet.

172
 ,

The Deity Irom GUndeslrup.

It turns out that the descendants of the "conquerors" not only

did not keep the rich material culture of the ancestors. but didn't
even know about it! Being illiterate, the Mongols unfortunately could
not read, in the works of the adherents of the Scaligcrian chronology,
that they were the descendants of Gcnghis Khan's warriors.
If one is to speak seriously then. the monuments of material
culture overturn the widely accepted historical concepts. The
nomads of the past, we repeat, do not have anything in common
with those of the present. And those naJlles which they received
in the historiography of the type "HUllS", "Scythians" and the like,
never were the names they c.alled themselves.
Linguists point to the fact that. for example, the word "Huns"
meant "a mixed people" in those days. The prominent French
linguist Emile Benveniste has discovered that "Goths" means not
some kind of definite tribe, but a hCi:lthen community, which
professes idolatry (Goetze is "stone image, statuc, idol").The natural
habitat of the Goths in a study of place namcs is defined thus: It
is southern Sweden (Goeteborg, En. Br.), Gothland Island in
the Baltic Sea), Gatta and Gottcngen in Upper" Saxony (Federal
Rcpublic of Germany).ln other words, traces of the Goths arc found
all over Western and Southcrn Europe.
They arc depicted as hCi:\then barbarians who encroached on
the boundaries of the Roman Empire, which bad recognized
Christianity. Whenever the Goths became monotheists, they
disappearcd from history. They thereby put the traditionalists
into a difficult I>osition: Where did they go? It had to be imagined

173
that they were swallowed up and dissolved by the great masses of
peoples they had conquered.
By the way, "barbarians" are only "bearded men". The name itself
arose, according to hhtorical measurements, very recently, when the
razor and scissors were invented and many men accepted shaving.
They began to call the unshaven "barbarians". There was nothing
offensive in it, although the traditional historiography has not stopped
using this word as a synonym for savagery and bnJtality.
The traditionalists, however, do not intend to repudiate the
generally accepted notions. This has forced them to create the
most complex systems for the classification of cities and sites of
ancient settlements discovered by archaeologists. The notions
"nomadic city" and "nomadic settlement," something like an Indian
camp ground but with homes of logs and stone, with defensive
walls and even fortress-like w<llls, often with a water supply and
sewerage, even smelting furnaces, have been introduced. The fact
that at least dozens of years are needed to build such a camp is
not taken into account. Questions have been avoided completely,
like where the nomadic metallurgists mined the are for melting,
and for what reason the nomads built water supplies and sewerage
systems if they intended to abandon the settlement as soon as the
pasture in the neighborhood was exhausted by their cattle (which
usually happens after one or two years).
A complex classification is used also for the designation of
state nomadic unions. Notions which are peculiar to a st~te and
specific nomadic features arc included, but altered to connote short
duration, instability, and absence of state institutions. one may
encounter in the descri ptions of the traditionalists, Semi-leaders,
Semi-kings, Semi-warriors, Semi herdsmen, Shepherd-kings, etc.
It is worth especially dwelling on the Serni·warriors. If one
is to believe the traditional history, the hordes, savage but knowing
how to fight well, attacked the civilized states. The nomads of the
Black Sea and Volga regions were especially distinguished. One
cannot even speak about the Huns and Mongols, the greatest
conquerors of all times and peoples. They destroyed the Persians,
Egyptians, Romans, Chinese and Byzantines so thoroughly that
only dust supposedly remained of what had been their states.
In other words. they were profesSionals of the highest class.
But who trained them? The nomadic communities in principle

174
cannot be professional military. The traditional historiography
results from a position contending that every Hun or Mongol
armed with a bow and a curved sabre is also that most dashing
fighting cock who rushes all his stallion around all Europe, bringing
fear and terror.
Such an explanation refutes the notion itself of the art of
war. It is understood that the ability to fight is a sort of an
inborn reflex, not unlike digestion. It is enough to want strongly,
and better still - to be in a rage, and victory is guaranteed. But
everyone knows well from authentic history that the strongest
countries militarily are those that are most developed culturally
and economic..111y. The traditionalists agree with this, but they
imagine that many centuries ago only cold steel mattered and
military training did not playa special role - that it was possible
to compensate for inferior ability with numbers.
The real situation looks differently. One can teach a recruit
in several months today to shoot and find refuge in a trench.
Years arc needed to master the techniques of hand-to-hand combat.
It is enough to look at the modern masters of fencing or judo. As
is known, regiments of musketeers of royal France, unsurpassed
masters of the sword, trained every day for many hours. It was a
question of life and death for them.
One cannot but note one more circumstance which is not taken
into account by the traditionalists. An army and war involve,
above everything else, problems of supply and logistics. Any
society has to be rich in order to maintain troops and carry out
military actions. This princi pIc for some reason has not been
appl ied to "ancient nomads". Perhaps it was Dot necessary to
supply their hordes on campaigns. Nor did they need maps and
any precise knowledge of a given region. Arms, armor, clothing,
horseshoes and h~lrnesses fell to the nomads from the sky or grew
on trces. Inasmuch as this cannot be, the traditionalists say that
the nomads bought or took the arms from neighbors in advance,
beforc a regular campaign. But in order to take these, it was necessary
to first conqucr them. 'With what for weapons? <S. Valyazhny,
D. Kalyuzhny "The Other History of Wars").
The problcm of quality of weapons supposedly did not exist for
the nomads. The multi-layered chain mail and heavy bows of an
enemy, Damascus blades and the red hot ti ps of arrows,swords and

175
slings played no roles. The longstanding selective breeding of military
horses, capable of carrying a heavily armed rider and moving in a
defined formation had no meaning where those very horses on
which the Hyksos came galloping into Egypt are concerned.
Modern military historians call the cavalry the "tanks of
antiquity". There was little infantry able to oppose the violent blows
of cavalrymen who combined, in those days, unsurpassed
maneuverability, speed and concealment of movement, with sheer
might of arms. A mounted scout, for that matter, is one with the
capacity to gather maximum information in minimum time about
the battle in progress and the condition of the troops. He enables
the commander to control them effectively, sending in the reserves
into the battle at the timely moment. Finally, without horses, any
kind of chariot with spikes on the wheels and special contrivances
which bring down and cri pple unmounted enemies is inconceivable.
Continuing a comparison of cavalry with tanks, it must be
said that for the advent of cavalry, as for the advent of tanks,
definite conditions were needed. Tanks could not appear until the
internal combustion engine was invented. Historians find the
first sketches of tanks, as also submarines and helicopters, in
Leonardo da Vinci's notes. But several hundred years passed
from the time of the great artist and engineer before tanks appeared
on battlefields.
Was a military cavalry able to appear simply because someone
somewhere had succeeded in taming a wild horse? Under no
circumstances. In order for horsemen to become a viable military
force, a definite level of development in industry is needed; in
particular, the production of irol1. The horse, before all else, needs
horseshoes.
We shall praise the horse's hoof. It is a unique natural invention
which combines hardness and resilience. Hooves sustain strong
blows against the ground. They allow horses to race as on springs
for a long time. But their horny parts quickly wear out when
running on solid ground, break off and crack. And beneath the
horn is a very sensitive Quick. On damage to the hoof, a horse
limps, and even refuses to step on his aching foot.
Therefore, the first horse·breeders already had to have contrived
a device for protecting their horses' hooves. They made stockings
and sandals from straw and hide, and braided them from bark. It

176
is understood that the straw or hide was not able to serve so very
long. Everything changed after people possessed a means of
obtaining iron. A material had appeared capable of preserving
horses' hooves from abrasion. No other metal was suitable for
this. Copper is too soft, and you cannot even fasten a horseshoe to
a hoof with copper nails: they bend, not penetrating the horny
layer. Only special iron nails are suitable for this operation.
They began to develop these only at the end of the 14th start
of the 15th centuries A.D. The iron industry was born at this
time: people learned how to smelt iron with the aid of special
furnaces and coal. Smelting is impossible without them. This is
why band iron appeared only in the Middle Ages as a popular
commodity. They made forged nails, horseshoes, knives, axes, swords,
sabers and heavy armor - everything that was needed for a combat
cavalry! Then - and only then - cavalry appeared.
True, the adherents of the Scaliger history maintain that man
used iron thousands of years ago in Asia, the Black Sea area and
other places. Here is what they write:
"It turns out the Celts taught the Romans how to obtain iron
and steel. The Celts knew various forms of thermal treatment of
steel, they used notches, shaft furnaces, bellows, and welding."
And another: ... "The Scythians had well developed handicrafts ...
The fighters ... wore plate-like metal armor - the predecessor of
chain mail, helmets and had steel swords"...
These arc the pseudo-scientific myths of the 20th century.
Either that or the Scythians lived in 15-16 A.D. One or the
other. One can draw such a conclusion, having reviewed the opinions
of spccialiat experts in mining and metallurgy.
In the "Mining Encyclopedia" it says:
"The first signs of iron-ore mining in Africa ... the majority of
the peoples of this continent got to know iron only in the epoch of
the Middle Ages. In the Middle Ages iron-making national
businesses were enlarged in Karclia ... (the regions of Eastern Europe
arc enumerated further) ... They obtained iron with a puddling
method from a brown iron ore in bloomeries and forges. The
beginning of blast furnace production dates from the 16th century".
As regards the other regions of Europe, the "Mining Encyclopedia"
maintains that the development of iron ore in ShUria began ill 712,
and in Bohemia, Saxony and France - from the 11 th century. Mining

177
legislation was adopted in the Czech city of Jinglava in 1249.
In c.onnection with this we note that pseudo-ancient historical
sources more often than not contradict others. If one is to believe
Livy, after a victory, the soldiers threw the enemy weapons and
armor into a large pile and burnt it. It is said just this simply:
"The leader of the cavalry, as usually happens in such a defeat of an
enemy, captured a large quantity of armor; he ordered the enemy
weapons dumped into a huge pile and he lit it and burned it
... "That means they were neither of iron Ilor copper.
The hjstorical importance of iron is indisputable not only with
horseshoes, but also with the wht.'c1. and this means also with chariots.
In the history textbooks it is maintained that the wheel as a
means of transportation "found usc in Mesopotamia nearly five
thousand years ago. The Romans learned to make solid vehicles,
and the service of horse-drawn carts was established quickly along
their excellent roads ... After the fall of the Roman Empire, all the
way until the 15th century, the majority of travelers are soldiers,
pilgrims, migrant tradesmen· they used mainly riding horses or
pack animals" ...
In other words, authoritative persons of encyclopedic
knowledge assure us that mankind for 15 centuries after the fall of
the Roman Empire lost the skills necessary for the manufacture and
use of wheeled transport. This is a simpleminded myth, concocted
to "explain: the legendary decline of Europe after "antiquity". An
invention of such enormous significance as the wheel was not able
to be forgotten by people. The historians of engineering insist on
this earnestly. Therefore, the conclusion is inescapable: there were
no chariots before the Middle Ages.
They can remind us that wheels and chariots arc portrayed
on the walls of the temples of Egypt in abundance. But, in the first
place, we already know how doubtful the antiquity of the temples
is. In the second, the depictions themselves are conditional. On
the walls of the temples, and also in the models of the chariots in
the tomb of Tutankhamen wheels are shown on which there are six
spokes. Not everyone knows that one can make such a wheel only
today from solid metal. Only an approximate model is possible
from wood, because the rim of such a wheel will not be round. A
round rim is obtained with 12 spokes.
A curved shaft is shown in the chariot depicted on a tomb in

178
Thebes. This also is a symbol, as it is not possible to bend a
wooden pole at an angle which will serve as a shaft. And you see
the Egyptologists write this in particular:
..."these carts consist<..>d largely of the two large wheels with
four spokes on each and a leather covering on the wooden rims ... A
pole passed beneath the floor which was further bent and connected
at an angle to a yoke around the horse's neck". (B. Meets).
One can bend a metal pi pc. With wood ,one can only model a
wheel with four spokes. The leather covers of twig rims are not
suitable for actual usc. With respect to the wheels in Tutankhamen's
tomb, the spokes of these wheels do not run through the rim, but
envelop it like a wishbone. It is impossible to use such wheels. A
rim without a band was modeled from twigs or from a reed. This
means it also is only a model. In which connection, see Medieval
(Igor Davidenko, Yaroslav Kesler "The Book of Civilization".
2001).
In particular, by the 15th century man, armed with steel
instruments, realized the ancient dream of chariots. A strong wheel,
a steel axle, a pin that holds the wheelan the axle, a reliable
connection of the shaft with the wheel movement, and harness -
this is what was needed for the chariots.
In connection with this, lines of the Old Testament about
chariots and iron come to mind. It speaks of Pharaoh sending his
chariots after the Israelites who were making the Exodus from
Egypt, which disappeared afterward in the deep of the sea. In
the "Book of Judges," (4:13) we read: "All your chariots, nine
hundred iron chariots, and all the people" ...
They did not make iron either in Egypt or in the Promised
Land in Biblical times. They didn't even make it in the days of
the legendary Alexander the Great, although Quintus Curti us Rufus
assures us that "iron claws, discarded as tools, enthralled the
multitudes". They didn't enthrall, because there weren't any. Iron's
time had not arrived.
And other facts give evidence of the medieval roots of the
legends and myths about ancient chariots. All the Byzantine
writers of the 12-13th centuries, in any mention of the nomadic
peoples of the Black Sea area, predominantly use their "ancient"
names alternately with the medieval ones - the ancient more often.
As Andrei Dobrolyubsky writes, "social-political, geographical

179
and everyday terminology of the ancient epoch is everywhere" on
the pages of the Byzantine medieval chronicles. Gerusia, hetaireia,
archonts, triery, oOOls, darics, staters and parasangs are real things
for the historians Fukidid and Xenophont. Augusti, caesari, patricians,
dux, magisters and praetors are encountered. A comparison with
the heroes of ancient mythology shows this to be no less so: Leon
Diakonos has the emperor Nicephorus Phocas corresponding to
Tydeus, and Anna Komnene compares her own father - Alcxios -
with Heracles. Similar comparisons are found in great number in
Psellus and Niccphorus Bryennius, who draw their own historical
examples from the histories of Brasidas, Alexander the Great and
Pericles. The portrayal of events and heroes properly conincides in
detail with the "ancient" historical short stories. It turns out that
Appianus, Dion Cassius, Ammian Marcellin, Theophylactus Simocata,
Constantine Porphyrogenitus, Kekaumenos, Psellus and Cinnamus
lived at one and the same time, as Andrey Dobrolyubsky emphasizes.
The reader, inbued with traditional history, can say with
reasonable skepticism: but you see what kind of achievements there
were! It cannot be that some kind of actual facts and events were
not behind even the fantastic suppositions about the "Dark Ages".
Actually, the achievements were as grandiose at that. But these
things happened in the Middle Ages, when the first worldwide
empire in the history of mankind was being created, not thousands
of years ago. The struggle against the masses of Hittites, Hyksos
and other hordes of nomads who periodically destroyed and
pillaged is a phantom reflection of the wars of the Middle Ages.
Numerous "nomadic cultures" are the direct and immediate
ancestors of the modern population of Europe and the Middle East.
The "Cimmerians", "Hittites", "Scythians", "Sannats", "Huns", and great
"Mongols" are different names of one and the same tribes who have
no connection with the severe steppes and deserts of Central Asia.

180
TH "MONGOL YOKE"
IN RUSSIA CHAPTER TEN

Russia's history is directly involved with those investigations

which concern the nomads, which we examined in the previous
chapter. We shall touch here on a few pages of this history, for the
basic methods of falsifying the past in service of the political interests
of ruling dynasties are neatly exemplified in them. These same
techniques are found, without exception, in the "histories" of all
Eurasian countries.
The "Mongolian" version was widely propagated in Russia.
Russian historians were not able to speak, in this, about the "savage"
tribes as they did about their own kinfolk. If they did, it would
turn out that Russia is not a European country. but Asian, and this
had a negative connotation in the Europe of the 18-19th centuries.
It suggested something hopelessly outdated, arrested in its
development.
Russians did not want very much to have such uncongenial
forefathers. This being the case, a slender and, at first glance,
extremely convincing version of the birth and development of the
Russian state was constructed which involved the dramatic
partici pation of both her western and eastern neighbors. With
respect to this, if the west brought to the forefathers of the Russians
the light of knowledge and a desired order, then the east supplied
nothing to them but difficulties.
in other words, the Scaliger-Petavius scheme which had been
contrived for Europe was adopted, but with one difference: they
called themselves Slavs rather than Romans, and the bad fellows -
the narrow-eyed and wide cheek-boned horsemen with bows and
arrows, who did not know how either to read, or write or think.
They could only shoot, kill and fill their bellies with half-baked
hor>cflesh - Mongols.
They find the beginning of this version in medieval
manuscri pts; that is, in the most ancient of the written sources for
181
 \
Rus. They are called variously: Radziwill, Laurentian, Ipatiev,
Trinity-St. Sergiy ... they named these after those monasteries in
which they were found. It is considered that some of them are
older and otbers . the less so. Some (supposedly) are originals,
while others have reached us only in copies because the originals
were burnt, were lost, were stolen, were buried - in short, disappeared
once and for all. In other words, we have here the same pattern
that we have already seen in the various other forgeries and
falsifications which form the basis of European history.
We say this with full confidence, because at this moment there
are very few indeed who dispute that all the known copies of the
manuscri pts, most 1ikely, were written at the end of the t 7th - start
of the 18th centuries and in one and the same place. The texts
copy each other in everything, even down to such small things as
turns of phrase. It is no less significant that all the copies known
today were written on one and the same paper with a characteristic
water mark: the "head of an ox". (Yaroslav Kesler).
Proof upon proof: coins are mentioned in these which were
supposedly in use as early as the 9 • 10th centuries. They took
taxes from the people in coins! Unfortunately, coins first appeared.
as numismatists who study the development of coinage irrefutably
show, not earlier than the late Middle Ages. But about this in
greater detail in the chapters following this one.
There is a passage in these manuscri pts which has provoked
the most prolonged and obsessive attention among Russian
historians down to this very day. They have been fighting about
it for the last two centuries. The reason for all this attention is
that it is the only account of the origin of the Russian state. And
this by no means satisfies everyone. They refute, defend and
interpret it in every various way possible. Without exaggeration,
dozens of volumes have been written about it.
Here is a version which causes a clash among the scientists
themselves who elucidate, "from whence the Russian land came".
In translation into contemporary language, it reads thus:
"In 859, the Varangians levied a tribute from abroad ... they took
as silver coin and as squirrel from smoke I that is, from any dwelling
over which smoke curled out of the chimney in the winter - author].
"In 860, 861 and 862, they exiled the Varangians beyond the
sea [Lake Ilmenl ... and started to rule by themselves to their
liking; and they had no order. .. and they began wage war against
182
each other. And they resolved it themselves among themselves:
"Let us find ourselves a prince in order to govern and judge us
according to law". And they went... to the Varangians. to the
Rus, as the Varangians called themselves; and they said... "All
our land is great and abundant, but there is no order in it; come to
reign and govern us". And three brothers were assembled with
their families, and they themselves headed all the nobility and
they came. The eldest Rurik sat in Novgorod, the second - Sineus
- in Beloozero, and the third - in Izborsk - Truvor. And from these
the Novgorod land was named Russia".
The key word in the passage is "Varangians".
A professor of the St. Petersburg Academy of Sciences,
Theophilus Siegfried Bayer, expressed the opinion in 1736 that this
is the llame of the Scandinavians who gave a state system to' the Rus.
After that, the so-called Norman theory of the origin of a state
system in Rus came into being. In subsequent centuries, dozens of
the most noteworthy historians both in Russia and abroad adhered
to it: G.Miller, A.Kunik, T.Ame, Nikolai Karmazin, A.Shakhmatov,
V.Klyuchevskiy and many others who made up the "Norman" school.
In time, a powerful school of "anti-Normanists" was created,
comprised of such as Mikhail Lomonosov, Stepan Krasheninnikov,
Yuri Venelin and 1. Shakolsky who considered that if there ever
had been such people as "Varangians", then these people were Slavs.
It must be explained why the two Russian schools still argue
so Violently. The subject of the disagreement carries with it
political overtones.
There is endless discussion of who, in the final analysis, the
Russians are - of whether they are Europeans or Asians, and of
what role Europe played in their destiny. The adherents of the
anti·Nonnan school thought, and think even now, that the Russians
themselves are capable of everything, withollt any influences from
outside, and that in general Russia is unique in every respect.
There never has been another such country and can never be one.
In particular Russia, they say, exercised a decisive effect on the
course of the history of all mankind over the centuries.
Nevertheless, today in the Russian language, for example, there
is a huge number of Turkisms - turns of speech and even grammatical
forms adopted from many neighbors including the Uigors and
Finns. Nor can one fail to notice the Arab influence as well. In any
event, it is beyond dispute that as early as the 17th century Russian
183
texts were sometimes written in Arabic (Kufic) letters. By 1656,
the travel notes of Archdeacon Pavel Aleppsky show that Arabic
letters were used in the writing of Russian words. That means
that this alphabetic systehl was in use in the territory of present
Russia. Evidences of such influences are endless.
According to legend, the L1urentian rnanuscri pt was compiled
in 1111-1113with the participation or full authorship of the learned
monk Nestor of the Kievo-Pechersk monastery, who wrote about
events 200-300 years previous to his time. Even if one assumes
that Nestor really existed, and this is extremely doubtful, the
question immediately arises: from what source did he come to
know about events three hWldred years old? If some kind of ancient
sources existed, then why rewrite them? For what purpose?
Here is how modern historians answer these questions:
"Obviously, he ... searched for some basis for the noble (princely,
royal) origin of the Rurick clan, since, being on a par with the
imperial and royal clans of Europe, the house of Rurick had to
show the requisite genealogical dignity". (Genrikh AJ10khin "A
New Hypothesis on the Origins of the State in Rus")
This phrase alone is worth a dozen lengthy dissertations about
those distant times. As also was the case in western Europe,
mythological pedigrees for rulers were created in Russia; genealogical
justifications which allowed the strong to declare their intrinsic
right to the control of the country. And one can consider the
Laurentian Manuscri pt to have been only the start of this process.
As time went on, the more the manuscri pts served the purposes
of state policy. From the end of the 15th and start of the 16th
centuries they are not content with a biased account of contcmporal)'
events by the chronicler, or to introduce biased interpretations into
the portrayal of the past, following after Nestor. A whole series of
officious legends took shape which validated the political claims of
Moscow, the rights of the Sovereign in Moscow to all Rus, to the
Kiev legacy and, finally, to the power of the Byzantine Emperors.
Tn other words, the rulers' appetites had grown. And the court
historians, having grasped the baton from the chroniclers,
"substantiated" these rights in their own works. Russia at the start
of its history already seems to Vasi Iy Tatishchev, one of the first
eminent Russian historians, a heredita.ry monarchy, controlled by
the "autocratic sovereigns" of the House of Rurick who received its
authority "by the will" of their Slavic predecessors. This was, in
184
 Tatishcbev's opinion, a period of prosperity and glory in the Russian
State.
So this was the chief and fundamental task of Russian
historians, formulated for the first time by Tatishchev: to prove the
lawfulness of the monarchial authority and its S<1.lutary influence
on the state's development. In this sense they in no respect differed
from their contemporary colleagues in Europe.
According to Tatishchev, the second period the decline -
4

began when Russia was divided between the multiplying "heirs"

of the prince's house who began "to regard themselves as equal to
the grand duke himself", thus weakening central authority. This
decline resulted in the breaking up of the state into parts, the
·refusal of the Lithuanian princes, previously "having been in
citizenship" to obey, the nullification of the prince's authority in
many cities and the establishment there of "their own democratic
governments". Finally, the nardir was reached in the enslavement
of Rus by the Tatars.
A very important moment: remarkable rulers arrived from the
West, and from the Orient the three-hundred year Tatar-Mongol
yoke was imminent.
The most eminent scientist, George Vernadsky wrole in the
work, "The Mongols and Russia":
"This was... a deeply continental wave; a singular wave of
uncommon force and a degree of effort unprecedented earlier. The
political submission of the Russian Earth to the Orient had begun
- the "Mongol yoke".
The forefather of Russian poetry, Alexander Pushkin wrote
(1834) still more harshly:
"For a long time Russia was isolated completely from the fate
of Europe. Her broad plains absorbed countless hordes of Mongols,
stopping their destructive invasion. Christian enlightenment was
saved by a tortured, dying Russia" ...
In this expression arc conveyed the core ideas of the official
version of the invasion: Russia struggled with the Mongols not
for life, but to death, forcing them to waste all their forces and
prott'Cting Europe by itself. As the result, she was torn away from
European civilization for several centuries.
This isolation, Russia's traditional historians explain, played a
decisive role in the fact that the country distinctly lagged behind
Europe in its development. Such an explanation was simple and
185
convenient in every respect. It allowed the root of the reasons for the
country's problcms to be found not within itself, but beyond her borders;
to blame its own miscalculations on foreigners and, thereby, to justify
the crimes of Russia's governments against its own citizens. And there
are many such crimes and miscalculations in Russian history.
In a word, "the Tatar-Mongol" yoke is of invaluable utility for
traditional historiography.
According to the official concept, the yoke itself passed through
several stages:
In the first half of the 13th century the powcrful Mongol
Empire arose in the expanse from the Yellow Sea to the Carpathians
as a result of violent achievements.
In 1206, Genghis Khan conquered Northern China and turned
his hordes westward. He subdued Turkistan, invadcd Persia, and
in 1222-1224 part of his troops, haVing rounded the Caspian Sea,
swept through Southern Rus.
In 1223, the Mongols routed Polovetsian and southwestern
Slavic troops.
The incursion into tile Caucasus came in 1230-1236.
In 1236, they ravaged Greater Armenia. "The Mongols burnt
almost all the Armenian cities and destroyed the capital of Greater
Armenia, the city of Ani, so badly that it could not recover after
this defeat".
In 1238 was the capture of Kiev.
In 1240 Poland was ravaged.
In 124 t, they routed the army of Henry the Pious near
Wroclaw.
In 1241, they invaded Poland and afterwards - Hungary,
Moravia and Silesia.
In 1242, the troops of the Khan Batu reached the shores of the
Adriatic Sea.
The written sources of that time tell what the European countries
were experiencing at the same time. The manuscri pts report:
"The fate of the Hungarian King, Bella IV. whose domains had
undergone complete devastation, werc testimony of the real threat
that hung over Italy, France and Germany ...
Moreover, frightening news of the Mongols was arriving in
the West from Georgia and Asia Minor. ..
A request for the aid of the Sultan of [conium, Ala' ad-
Din Kay-Qubad ...
186
 In 1238, an embassy arrived in Europe from the leader of the
Ishmaelites ... who were inducing fear on Syria and Iraq. The
Ishmaelites asked for help to save them from the Mongol conquerors".
The world, in a panic, was getting used to the kind of people
that made up the armies of the oppressors, and fixed their
observations in various letters, notes and reports. These observations
and facts, it is necessary to point out, contradict the official
historiography radical Iy.
There are notes of the Hungarian king and a letter to the Pope in
which it was said that the Mongol troops consist of Slavic troops.
"When (the king wrote) the state of Hungary, as from a plague,
was turned into a wasteland from the Mongol invasion and, like a
sheep~fold was surrounded by various tribes of unbelievers, namely:
by Russians, Brodniks from the Orient, Bulgars and other heretics
from the south".
As early as before the conquest of Rus "some part of the Rus with
their leader Plaskinia alrC<'l.dy were fOWId with the Mongol troops".
"Russian people composed the main mass of the armed, serving
and working forces of the Golden Horde...

The driving away of Russian captives to thB Horde. An old miniature from a Hungarian chronicle, dared
1488. The Mongols, who are driving away the prisoners to the Horde are portrayed in Cossad< caps. TIley
have slrikingly pronounced Slavic faces and beards. Besides that. they are dressed in Russian clothing -
Iong·skirted caftans and boots, And the C<lj)tives are dressed in Westam European clothing - a /rock 10 the
knees, shoes and the like. They have no beards. If they had drawn this miniature in our lime, lhen lhey
lVOJJld portray the "Mongols' as typical Asians. and they would draw the captive Russians precisely how
the "Mongols' are portrayed in this old miniature. But the old artist still didn'lllnow Ihe Romanovsk version
of Ihe "Tatar·Mongol yoke" on Rus and simpfamindedly drewit as it was in reality. (Anaroly Fomenko)

The main mass! That is, Slavs played practically the main role,
all these Rus, Brodnik, Bulgars and "other heretics".
187
 The researcher, A.Gordeev has devoted much effort and time to
the study of the history of the COSS<'lcks who lived for ages on end in
the south of Russia and who are considered the residents of the
military settlements that were created for the protection of the southern
borders of the country from the Turks. He discovered the following:
"There is information in the Moscow chronicles about the
existence of the Cossacks among the troops of the Golden Horde".
And further: "The name "Cossacks" was given to that part of
the troops who were among the armed forces of the Horde's light
cavalry units ... In the second half of the 12 th century there were
indcpendent tribes living in eastern and central Asia who bore'
the name of the "Cossack /·{ordes" ... ("History of the Cossacks").
It turns out that the "Mongols", in relationship to the Slavs,
conducted themselves rather strangely for conquerors. An
Orthodox Church was built at the Khan's headquarters from the
first days of the organization of the Horde. With the establishment
of military settlements within the boundaries of the Horde, they
began to call upon the clergy and to establish a church hierarchy.
The Metropolitan Cyril moved from Novgorod to live in Kiev
where the Metropolis of all Rus was established for him.
Such behavior on the part of foreign conquerors looks absurd
by any standard. Especially for that time, when the conquerors
were subjecting the vanquished countries to fire and sword. That
very same Hungary was ravaged utterly by the "Mongols".
The well known Arabic traveler Rashid-ad-din says that
Christianity was stronger than Islam during the time of Guyuk.
The Christians Qadaq and Chinqai managed all the Khan's offices,
and Qadaq even had the responsibility for the Atabek under Guyuk.
The medieval documents maintain: rn 1248, two ambassadors
who arrived from the Mongol Empire held discussions with Ludwig
IX and "they reported that the great Khan Guyuk, who considered
himself on his mother's side the grandson of the presbyter Johann
(a Christian ruled), recognized baptism and forced eighteen
Mongol princesses to be baptized".
The ambassadors themselves also were Christians.
The modern historiography does not like such a report, and
comments on it look like this one: the ambassadors wanted to
establish rapport with LudWig and therefore, they said that they
were Christians, too. The purpose of such comments is
understandable: the Slavs, and evcn more so the Christians, were
188
supposed at all costs to remain good boys, that is, to have nothing
in common with the "Mongols".
But here is bad luck: the allusions are frequent in the documents
to the fact that the "Mongol" khans were married to Byzantine
princesses. And that the Byzantine emperors willingly took as
wives the daughters of the eastern Chagan rulers. For example,
Justinian II married a Chagan's daughter who received at baptism
the name Theodora. Tiberius 11 also marries a Chagan daughter
and returns from Khazaria to Constantinople in 708 with a Khazar
retinue. The daughter of another Chagan was the wife of
Constantine V (741-775), her Christian name being Irina.
In the 9th century, the Byzantine Emperors created a Khazar
guard at the court. Many of the Khazar military rose to high rank
in the Emperor's army and administration.
We are not here again belaboring the dates involved, already
cited within the framework of discussing the ScaJigerian
chronology. As already said, the archaeological remains do not
support the existence of huge tribal (and what is more, state)
formations on the territory of the Black Sea area in the 8th -10th
centuries. So there was (at least officially]) nowhere from which
Constantine could have taken the "daughter of a Chagan" as a wife
in the middle of the 8th century. We also will not touch on the
terminology within the framework of which the Slavic tribes of
that time are called Russians. Right now, another matter is more
important: the strong kindred ties of the leaders of Byzantium
and "Tatar-Mongolia".
But what then evolvt."<1?
The delicate Byzantine princesses were resettled from their
own luxurious palaces to yurts· the tents of the savage nomads,
tended sheep, milked mares, froze and chewed the tough horse·
f1esb with difficulty. Some did not know how to write, at that
time, like the others· yet they composed poems and historical
works. Some drank koumiss, wrapping themselves up in dirty hides,
the others - choice wines, while lying on soft beds.
A fantastic picture that has nothing in common with reality.
The frequent mutual marriages, as Anatoly Fomenko emphasizes,
deliberately refer to the commonality of religion and the intimacy
of the culture. So, all these "Khazars" and "Mongols" were not
savage nomads.
They manifested touching concern not only for the spiritual
189
health of a subjugated Russia, but for Christianity as a whole.
For example, the Russian system of communication, which existed
before the end of the 9th century, was also introduced by the
"Mongols," including the coachmen wei] known to everyone.
And even the name yamshchik (coachman) is of Turkic origin.
(Gleb Nosovskiy, Anatoliy Fomenko "Reconstruction of World
History". "Rome and Rus").
An analysis of the manuscri pts of that pcricxl testifies to the fact
that there are no panicky notes in them in connection with an invasion
of Mongols. They recount the most commonplace events: which
churches were built, who married whom, and so forth. And they
absolutely did not note that at this time foreigners supposedly are
conquering them, creating on their lands a huge alien empire, means
of communication new and unusual to them, bridges and the like.
The conclusions of Anatoly Fomenko and his followers, adherents
of the new chronology, in our view, are beyond any question correct:
the so-called Tatar-Mongolian yoke was simply a period of military
rule in the Rus-<;ian state. No foreigners captured it.
The supreme ruler was a military leader - the Khan. He was
the king. His deputies - princes - stayed in the cities. They
collected the notorious "tribute to the Tatars" - a state tax for the
maintenance of thc troops.
They collected too the well known "tribute of blood": they
conscripted every tenth man into the army - not temporarily, but
from childhood itself and for life. By the way, such an enlistment
was operative in Russia for several more centuries, even after the
"defeat of the Tatar-Mongol". It could be asked why this custom
endured for so long a time in Rus, whcn it was supposedly established
by the hated foreigners? It is usually the other way: when foreign
dominion is cast off, its heritage is destroyed and damned.
"Tatar incursions" also are well-known, terrible in their
consequences. But it is correct to call them flat incursions, but
punitive expeditions against those areas that for some reason refused
to pay tribute or had risen up against the central authority.
Common Slavonic was the state language in the empire. There
are no documents maintained in the archives in the Turkic
languages. But there were at least two spoken languages - Slavonic
and Tatar. In which connection, not only did the Tatars know
Russian, as today, but the Russians also knew Tatar.
Turkic titles were in wide fashion, that very "Chagan", which is
190
mcntioned in medieval European documents. Addressing Grand
Dukc Vladimir, Metropolitan llIarion praises him: "To our Volodimir
Chagan." And the head of the church of that time says this!
Lev Gumilcv states:
"The rulers of the Avar, Bulgars, Magyars and even the Rus
were the Khans: Saint Vladimir, Yaroslav the Wise and, finally, his
grandson - Oleg Svyatoslavich - bore this title.
The Dagestanni scientist and writer Murad Adji did some
very interesting research. In the book, "Polov Field Wormwood"
he realistically maintains:
"The Ki pchak were not savage, with slanted eyes, as it is
usual to represent us in Russian history. We arc typically a blue-
eyed, Iight·haired, stocky people... At first the community of the
Steppe people was divided into three classes. The aristocrats were
called "Uzden", the simple people "Cossacks", and the serfs "Kul".
These social differences were emphasized by clothing: The Uzden
wore Astrakhan caps, the Cossacks, sheepskin hats. The wearing of
a sheepskin hat was forbidden to the Kul".
Murad Adji i.nvites readers to look at a geographic map of
Russia. Almost all the names of the Chernozem part of the country
have Turkic roots.
The Oka is "the river with a current", Tula is "full", Saratov,
Penza, Rostov, Azov, Aydyr, Buzuluk, and Khoper. Dozens and
dozens of names. All of them are mute witnesses of the past. "In
the 19th century everything suddenly became "Russian", and we
are an .obscure people, few in number", Murad Adji writes bitterly.
One call underst.and him. But he is mistaken in t.hinking t.hat.
the ancient. Slavs and ancient Turkic peoples opposed each other:
They were at. one time the only state. And, by the way, of the highest.
standard even now. The Mongol-Tataria and Great Rus are one and
the same. And the Cossacks are not former exiles, exiled for their
transgressions to the ends of the empire, as they teach in t.he history
books, but. the Horde, stratified in ethnic comlXJSition, upholding on
their shoulders, for several centuries, order in the empire.
Toward the end of the 14th century great troubles began in
this empire. Approximately 25 khans were replaced in 20 years.
The t.roubles ended with the famous Battle of Kulikovo (1380). In
it, Prince Dmitri Donskoi defeated Mamai • the actual ruter of the
Horde. Which of them was a Slav, which a Turk - the question is
illegitimate. It. would be more nearly correct t.o call the participants
19 t
Meeting of a foreign ambassat:IDf in Rus. All Old engraving rrom an edilion 01 Sigismund Hert>ershlein's book,
"Noles 011 MUSCO\I)" ~Iy /rom 1576 although, most 1ikaIy, printed in this form in the eatty 17th cen/usy.
Pay atlanlion to the dol1ling in which the Rvssian dignilary is meeting the ambassador. The huge lutban with
Jhe fea/he( 011 the head 01 /he Russian official is especially 8Yt1ent. From /he left in /he badqJtoond ale seen
the Russian troops - Cossacks in fur IlBls with fea/flers or turbans' (Anatoly Fometlko).

of the battle by one and the same name: a Slavic-Turkic ethnos.

It is thought that the liberation of Russia from the foreign
conquerors began with this battle. Judge for yourself.
According to the manuscri pls, a border dispute arose between
the prince of Great Novgorod, Dmitri Donskoi, and the princes of
Ryazan and Lithuania, Oleg and Olgerd. Oleg and Olgerd decided
to expel Dmitri from Moscow and a number of other cities. For
the realization of their plan, they invited King Mamai, it is
recounted in "The Saga of Mamai's Slaughter".
The troops gathered in battle on Kulikovo Field, approximately
300 kilometers from Moscow. A great number of soldiers
participated in this battle, which lasted only half a day. Tens of
thousands were killed! The chroniclers recount that, when it was
over, it took six days to sort through the bodies. There were 110,000
bodies of their own dead alone, not to mention the bodies of the
enemy. They carried the nobles to Moscow for burial and buried
the rest on the spot, at Kulikovo Field.
Such is the general outline.
When the researchers begin to systematically come to grips
with the "Mamai Slaughter", details began to emerge which put
almost everything that is known about it in doubt.
For one thing, the well-known texts about the battle contain
different assessments. Yes, it took place but, for example, the Pskov
I manuscri pt mentions the battle along with the sinking in Chudskoc
192
 I _-- ',"ul•
_."" . _- -
ra ...
it,uu,
_
.....
- -
• ,",f ' _ _'
-_.~

- ---_.
..It ..

_...
--_...r'
" --_.........
~,...---
"L Olea 11 ..:1 1I~ _

Cost of Irms 01 the city of Berezna, Ch6migov Province, approved on 4 June t782. On Ih8 CCJat of anns,
among other depictions, are two crescent moons with siJ-poinred stars.
The old coat of arms of the Kostroma Province. We once again see lhe crescent moon and a cross.
eoal of lurns of the city of Uralsk and the UTitsk ObllSt. Apptoved on 5 June t878).
Coal of arms of Starolconstantlnov of the Volynsk Province. Approved on 22 January 1796). It incfudes
a crescent moon witfl a star. A cross with a CI'eSCeIlI moon, which is located on /tie cupolas oIltle Russian
lemples, and Ihe Turllish crescent moon with a slar - these afe only various forms of one and the ssme
symbol. Alter Iflal. as the Empire was craoong. the symbofs also were divided.

Lake of fOllI boats; that is, as a most ordinary event. The Novgorod
1 manuscri pt tells about it as an especially Muscovite incident, not
implying anything about it being a nation-wide upheaval. And in
the Lithuanian and Ymodzka Chronicle, under 1380 it indicates
that the winter was very severe; many animals perished - both
domestic and in the forests. Regarding the battle - not a word,
although Jogailo, the Lithuanian grand duke, was supposedly
involved in it. (Dmitri Kalyuzhny, Aleksandr Zhabinsky "The
Other History of Rus").
With respect to the field on which the conflict took place, there
have been no traces of any battle discovered in it, even though there
are supposed to be tens of thousands of graves in it! A published
193
rerx>rt says that a local archaeological society has been digging in
this field since 1982. A complete picture of the field has been
reconstructed. Hundreds of meters of trenches were dug. They even
invited people with extrasensory abilities to provide them with clues.
"However, not one imrx>rtant object was found in years of searches
which would make it certain that a battle had occurred - especially
in the northern part of the field, wrote "Russkaya Gazeta" (6 July
1995).
Only when the researchers acquired the newest American metal
detectors of the Fisher firm did they find some iron arrowheads.
This in 20 and more years of excavating! "Searches are continuing",
the newspaper reported cheerfully.
Adherents to the new chronology are proving that the battle
took place not 300 kilometers from Moscow, but in Moscow it<;elf,
on the site called "Kulishka", which existed even earlier than the
city itself. (Digest "Old Moscow").
Complete arbitrariness prevails in reports about the strength
of the forces. Some think that Dmitri's forces numbered half a
million men; others, only twenty thousand.
Mamai's troops are estimated to have been equal to or larger
than those the enemy had.
But here are the estimates of specialists. The population of
Rus at the end of the 14th century was approximately four million
people. If one considers that a whole series of areas did not take
part in the battle, then mobilization would take place among a
population of approximately onc million. The call-up of more than
one percent for that time is extreme. This means that the full
mobilization did not exceed ten thousand men. ("Another History
of Rus"). There can be no question of hundreds of thousands.
The military and political results of the battle were trifling for
Dmitri Donskoi. The prince had defended his ancestral lands,
but only barely. Two years later, a new Horde leader captured
Moscow. Thus, the battle was of no lasting historic significance.
According to the traditional history, the Tatar-Mongol yoke
declined one hundred years after the Mamai battle.
As Dmitri Kalyuzhny and Aleksandr Zhabillsky rightly note,
"Historians make the greatest use of this battle who cater to an
ideology: a wonderful myth had appeared, based on real events and
reinforced by document", which were capable of being exaggerated
for political purposes". Let us add with enthusiasm: for patriotic
194
purposes, which have no place in an objective analysis of history.
Another famous battle in the history of Russia has been falsified
for this same purpose, one of the most legendary and renowned - the
Battle on the Ice on Chudskoe Lake. This battle was supposedly on
5 April 1242, during those same years when the "Mongols" had
conquered Russia. Grand Duke Alexander Nevsky, according to
traditional history, fought the Teutonic knights who had invaded
to capture originally Russian lands, routing them on Chudskoe Lake.
Fifteen thousand men were involved; During the battle, thousands
of them, being in heavy armor, broke through the thin spring ice. So
reads the legend celebrated in literary works and movies.
The contemporary historian and archivist Anatoly Bakhtin has
studied the chronicles and manuscri pts of those times for more
than twenty years. With what result? He didn't find anything in
any document that would support this legend. On the contrary, it
turns out that the Teutonic Knights who lived in Lithuania had
very warm and friendly relations with all the neighboring Slavic
cities. Both the Slavic and German manuscri pts show that they
were allies in joint military campaigns against aggressive neighbors.
The battle itself was a common feudal skinnish between Pskov
and Novgorod. Only twelve knights took part in it on Pskov's side.
They played no role in civil strife. And the grand duke did not hold
hostile feeling toward them. The decrees of Alexander Nevsky con finn
this after the victorious battle: he ordered the construction of a Catholic
Church in Pskov. ("Izvestia" newspaper, 12 April 2004).
The Russian manuscri pts mention the Battle Oil the Ice in
passing. It is generally not mentioned in the L1urentian chronicles.
They "remembered" it only centuries later, when some ancient
symbol of military valor became necessary for patriotic purposes in
the struggle with Western enemies. And here the Battle on the Ice
became· in the account of the traditional historians - a grandiose
battle with the partici pat ion of thousands and thousands of
Teutonic knights. "History" once again lied in the service of
momentary political expediency.
What else happened with the Horde? It existed until the
beginning of the 17th century. Its history ended with the famous
Time of Troubles. As a result of these, the Horde's (military)
rulers were destroyed. The essentially new, pro·Western dynasty
of the Romanovs came to power in Rus, seizing power also in the
churches (Filaret).
195
 A history "legitimizing" its authority was needed by the new
dynasty, so one was manufactured. In principle, even the national
concept "Russians" itself was invented then.
Traces of the unity of the "Mongols" and the "Russians" were
scattered throughout many compositions of the Western European
historians, travelers and di plomats. Phrases of the type, "such-
and-such a Moscow sovereign appeared with the Tatars in such-
and-such a military campaign" are frequent.
Here, for example, is a quotation from Herbershtein's book (16th
century): "In 1527, they [the Muscovites- Author} again appeared
with the Tatars (mit den Tartaren angezogell), as a result of which
the famous battle of Kanev (bey Carionen) took place in Lithuania".
The medieval German chronological table, published in
Brau llschweig in 1725 (Deutsche Chronologische Tabellen.
Braunschweig: BerlCb'Ct von Frk>drich Wilhelm Mener, 1725), reports:
"Johannes Basilowiz, Erzersiel mit denen tartam und brachte
an sein Reich Casan und Astracan. (Chronological Table 1533,
page 159)."That is: "Ivan Vasilievich (Ivan the Terrible) with his
Tatars took Kazan and Astrakhan for his kingdom".
From the point of view of the modern chronology, it is a strange
declaration. You see, the Czar went to wage war with the Tatars, as
is written in the history textbooks! Why then take Tatars with you
to war ? The bewilderment disappears when one knows that the
Czar took a Cossack Horde to war - regular forces - and that present-
day Rus was known as Tatar-Mongolia in the West for centuries.
Several explanations exist regarding the name "Mongolia".
One of the most basic is the opinion of the scientist N. Morozov.
He thinks that it is the Greek word MegaHon, that is, "Great". It
is not for nothing that one of the famous historians, N. Karamzin,
as also other authors, has written not "Mongolia", but "Mogolia",
which is even closer to MegaHon.
Up to this point, Eastern Rus is called Great Russia. Therefore,
the "Mongol Empire" is nothing other than the "Great Empire".
The name "Mongol Empire" itself is of Western, not of Slavic
origin. And the fact that today we know "Mongolia" as one of the
Asian countries changes nothing. Over time, many worlds acquire
new senses as these shift around 011 the world's maps. This
phenomenon is typical not only of past centuries, but even of our
time: it may well be that, two or three hundred years from now,
scientists will puzzle over why there are cities called Moscow, St.
196
Petersburg and Odessa not only in Russia and in Ukraine, but
also on the North American continent.
The researcher,A. Nerlinsky, has been analyzing ancient maps
of the 18th century and has discovered surprising things. In the
place where even today the Kuban Cossacks live, and this is the
south of Russia, is written "Kuban Tatars" - Cubanse Tartari. This
means that the emperor Peter 1 and his cartographers only two
centuries ago were calling the Cossacks "Tatars"!
On a 1755 map in French "Carte de divifee en fes Princi paux
Etats" Rus - Russie is depicted in the location of modern Ukraine,
and to the east and north is a large area called Muscovy - Moscovie.
The city of Moscow, by the way, is located on the border of Rus and
Muscovy, so to say, between them. The region around Moscow is
called Gouvernement de Moscow. Consequently, medieval Rus is,
originally and basically, a southwestern Slavic region. That is, it
corresponds apprOXimately to modern Ukrai.ne, which was conquered
in the p'rocess of the unification of the state by the northeastern
Slavs· the "Mongols." And these "Mongols" arrived from Muscovy.
On a 1754 map in French "I - e Carte de l'Asie" the inscription
"Emperie Russienne" goes through all the huge territory of the Russian
Empire, all the way to the Pacific Ocean, including Mongolia, the Far
East,etc, But there is a second inscri ption through that same territory
w;th larger letters: GRANDE TARTARJE, that;s GREAT TATARIA.
On other maps, in particular, on the "Map of the Russian Empire
and Europe - Carte d l'Empire de Russie en Europe. 1755", Russia
also is called GRANDE TARTARIE. Moscow Tatars are designated
within. There are also oUler Tatar areas -
Independent Tataria· Tartaric lndependante,
Chinese Tataria - Tartaric Chilloise,
A Tataria near Tibet,
Lesser Tataria - The Crimea, south and east of Ukraine.
In a word, Tataria is everywhere. "Tataria" is Russia itself!
The maps supplement the evidence of King Ludwig IX's
ambassador, William of Rubruck. In the middle of the 13th century,
he was traveling with his retinue along the lower Don to the
headquarters of the Khan Batu, and he entered into his diary
everything noteworthy that he saw:
"Everywhere the villages of the Rus are scattered among the
Tatars; the Rus have been mixed with the Tatars they have
mastered their ways; also their dress and way of life The women
197
adorn their heads with head-dresses similar to the head-dresses of
Frenchwomen; they edge the bottom of the clothing with the fur
of otters, squirrels and ermine. The men wear short clothing:
caftans, chekmins and winged hats... All means of transportation
in this vast country are operated by the Rus; Rus are everywhere at
the river crossings". (A. Gordeev "History of the Cossacks").
William of Rubruck traveled in 1252, only 15 years after the
conquest of the Rus by the Mongols (if, of course, one believes the
traditional historiography). Wouldn't it be too quick for the native
population to adopt the customs and even the clothing of the
conquerors? Even after the Mongol-Tatars had succeeded in
building their own settlements among the Slavs?
Rubruck's bewilderment looks somewhat comical from the
modern point of view: "The women, as also ours, wear decorations
on the head... the men wear upper clothing like the German". The
ambassador clearly expected to see "savage" nomads. By the way,
even N.Kararnzin somewhat later wrote that "travelers of the 13th
century did not find any differences in the clothing of our and
the Western peoples". (N. Karamzin "History of the Russian
State"). That is, ordinary people lived on the expanses of the
Empire who were indistinguishable from Europeans and from each
other - the Rus, the Tatars, and other tribes.
So just where are the nomadic Mongols - the conquerors? There
are none in authentic history. They have been galloping on their
spirited horses for several centuries now only on the pages of the
official historiography.

An enlarged fragment with an image 01 medieval Muscovites, on Ih6 heads 01 whom aJe tIHbans. They aJ8
dressed ill long Russian catrans, and armed wifh sabets, booNs and muskets. This is an image from a French
publjcaliotl wtIidI is (aJe flOW: "A Desc$tiM of the Universe", I'I1licIl C(I(ltains various diagrams of the 11'011:1...

198
THE CHINESE VARIANT
OF HISTORY CHAPTER ELEVEN

In the second half of the 18th century, events began in China

which were extraordinary in duration and consequences. Historians
write thus: In 1772, a collection of all printed books was undertaken
which at some time had been published in the country. The
collection continued for 20 years. 172,626 volumes (10,233 titles)
were collected! There were 360 people engaged in reviewing and
processing the volumes collected. All books were divided into fOUf
categories, from which the I ibrary received the title "Siku Quanshu",
that is, "A Full Collection of Books of the Four Repositories".
However, this was neither a "collection" nor a "library". A
gran(Jjose operation had taken place for withdrawal of books that
contained "dangerous thoughts" and a no less grandiose operation
on the falsification of the texts. The withdrawal of forbidden books
took place 34 times under Emperor Qianlong in the interval from
1771 through 1782. After a lapse of a number of years, "3,457 titles
were produced in a new edition, and the remaining 6,766 titles
were described in detail in an annotated catalog... In the new
editions that were produced, all unwanted places were withdrawn,
and even the names of the books were changed" (World History,
Volume 5, Moscow, 1958). The reasons indicated are the following:
In the third century B.C., the first famous protective wall had
hardly had been built and the Chinese grandees had just started
to divide the just fenced off state into separate parts. At the same
time, they were quoting the ancient books ... And because of this,
all books in China were destroyed by order of the Emperor".
We will return again to the famous deterrent, that is, to the
Great Wall of China and the time of its creation. But meanwhile,
regarding repressions of books and opposing philosophers,
philologists and historians: The persecutions continued over two
centuries ~ throughout the rule of the emperors Kangxi, Yongzheng
and Qianlong. They executed the learned men, locked them in

199
prison, and exiled them as far away as possible from the capital.
Of what were they guilty?
They considered Chinese civilization insufficiently ancient.
In particular, Hui Tung (1697·1758) refuted the authenticity
of all ancient monuments. And Dai Zhcn (1723-1777) advanced
the assertion that original facts of history, historical geography
and chronology were necessary for understanding the monuments
of olden days.
Simultaneously an exceptionally rapid activity for writing of
the correct history was on-going. So the operation was repeated
in China that had take place in Europe in the Middle Ages. Only
in Europe it had occurred without the mass executions. There are
practically no differences in the rest. And if right now someone
repeats again and again the thesis about the extreme antiquity of
Chinese history, it is enough to say that we know about its antiquity
only from the well edited and, as we see, re-written sources of the
end of the 18th century. That is, from falsified sources.
The fact that the operation was performed at that time in
particular is not accidental. In the 17th century, more precisely
in 1&44, the Manchu conquered China. They brought with them
their own chronicles, which dealt with events in other countries.
Judging by what was written about these in the edited Chinese
books, these were chronicles of European and Byzantine history.
At first, after the arrival of the Manchu in China, people certainly
remembered what was said in the chronicles. However, after 130
years they either forgot or the Manchu decided to transplant
European history to Chinese soil. Especially since, by that time,
they already had been assimilated by the Chinese to a significant
degree. Thus the "transplanting" occurred.
According to one of the versions of researchers (Nikolai
Morozov), those European chronicles, which afterward were made
the basis of "China's ancient history," arrived in Ch.ina only during
the time of the Catholic missionaries in the 17th century, a version
which convincingly explains who in particular inspired the emperors
to undertake a cardinal revision of the past.
Events were moved into antiquity, in accordance with the
traditional chrono logy, by approximately by two thousand years.
And the dynasty of the Manchu Khans of the 17 - 18th centuries
A.D. "left for" there, changing into the "ancient HAN dynasty".

200
The Chinese chroniclers didn't puzzle for a long time over what to
call its own ancient empire. They named it correctly: HAN.
But if a real dynasty of the 18th century was to be exiled into
antiquity, the olle which sent it there had to live in about the 19th
century. Otherwise, he wouldn't know anything about it. This
agrees well with the fact that in particular in the middle of the
19th century, the fi.nal version of the "ancient Chinese history"
became known in the West.
Considerable information indicates that the Manchu are
Europeans, even in their faith and names. If one considers that
contemporary Chinese pronunciation of ancient names, titles and
the like strongly differs from the former, then one can locate in
them well-known names and terms from European history.
Ar:; David Wright writes: "Many of these Asian Christians bore
Christian names, which have come to us in Chinese transcri ption.
for example, O-su-mu (Joseph) or Ko·li-tzi-sy (Georgiy).
If no one had said this beforehand, no one wou ld SllSp<.'Ct it.
Discussions about the uniqueness, peculiarity and antiquity of
China's history rely to a significant degree in particular on sllch a
distortion of European and Christian names and terms in Chinese
pronunciation. For comparison: it is worth rewriting and then
reading a European chronicle in Chinese transcription, and you
will not recognize the text that already is well-known to you. It
will look and sound Chinese.
Pronunciation plays in this instance a colossal role. And here
is why. Names are communicated by means of hieroglyphs by
seeking similar sounding hieroglyphs in the language being used.
And then writing - and consequently, reading - of old Chinese
names turns out essentially dependent on \vho in particular
originally translated it into the hieroglyphic writing.
Moreover, language is constantly changing. A name, which
originally sounded onc way, in several hundred years takes on a
completely different sound in the changed language, evcn if the
hieroglyph by which it was written remained as before.
Therefore, specialists also warn that reading the ideograms
themselves depends on the time they were written. These have
been reformed many times. The last great reform in China and
Japan was in our own era - in the 20th century. Today it is
impossible to read many old ideograms within the framework of

201
the numerous renewals and changes of hieroglyphjc writing.
This peculiarity of hieroglyphs has led not only to a distortion
of names. It has influenced the understanding of all Chinese history,
extremely complex and chaotic. "From a first glance at the complete
work of Chinese history, one might assume that everything had
already been done in it and, that for one who knows Chinese, it
remains only to read the many volumes and extract information
from them absent·mindedly. But in the event it turns out to be
nothing like this. Besides the strange arrangement which compels
those involved to first sort through all the works in order to get
an adequate notion of one kind of individual event, besides the
exhausting work and beSides the steady critical effort which,
however, may reveal the truth only with a full study of the subject,
questions, moreover, are presented constantly to the historian, for
which he will seek resolutions in vain, and he will constantly
encounter distortions and omissions" (P. Vasiliev, sinologist).
And it is understood - why. When they tried in the
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries to translate some old
inscri ptions made with half-forgotten ideograms into new ones,
the translators already hardly understood the previous meaning of
that on which they were working. Therefore, they had to add
much "on their own behalf". Introducing explanations, they
exaggerated the volume of sources. And this occurred, apparently,
more than once. And thus these chaotic, tangled, unclear chronicles
resulted.
We have seen the same thing in European history, but not to
such a degree. There were confusion in names, in terms, and
geographic names that "floated" around the map where they liked.
But the individual letters nonetheless had more or less permanent,
unchanging sounds. Matters were completely otherwise in China.
Here chaos grew to monumental proportions.
Therefore, those historians attracted to the European material
become embarrassed when they start to study a kind of such well
and conscientiously set forth history of China by the "ancient Chinese
chroniclers" (Anatoly Fomenko, Glcb Nosovskiy: "The Empire").
If one translates all the names encountered in the old Chinese
chronicles, then these chronicles lose their Chinese appearance and
association to the territory of modern China. They all have a
sensible translation.

202
 Nikolai Morozov has written:
"'n all Chinese histories we read: "In the third century,
between 221 and 264, there ruled simultaneously in China three
emperors: Zhao Lc Oi, Ven Oi and Oa Oi. .. At the beginning of
the (ourth century there was the Eastern Jin Dynasty, the most
(amous emperor in which was Wu Oi. .... Afterwards, from 317
through 419, there was the \Vestern Jin dynasty, in which the
emperors were Huan Oi, Min Di, Chen Oi, Kun Oi, etc..... 1s it not
obvious, how well everything here is historically documented (or
the Chinese as a nation? But remember that these names are not
written as sounds, but as pictures. When this is done, the pseudo-
documentary tale loses not only historical, but also Chinese
signi ficance national Iy.
It will turn out as (allows:
"In the third century between 21 t and 264 there ruled
simultaneously in the Mediterranean Empire three emperors:
"CLEARLY PASSIONATE, LITERARY AND GREAT... At
the start of the (ourth century there was the WESTERN
PROSPERITY, the most famous emperor in whom was the
MILITARY EMPEROR... And afterwards, from 317 through 419,
there was the EASTERN PROSPERITY, in which the emperors
were the FIRST MAIN EMPEROR, the MOST ENLIGHTENED
EMPEROR, the CONCLUDING EMPEROR, the PROSPERITY
EMPEROR, etc. What remains now of the Chinese nationally?
Nothing. "It even seems unintentional that here is very well
described the Mediterranean Empire of Diocletian on the shores
of the Mediterranean Sea".
It is worth gaining an understanding o( the names of peoples
living supposedly on the territory o( China in the ancient times.
On closer investigation, they turn out to be European.
In China's history the HUNNU people are well known. But
at the start of our era, those very Hunnu (j.e., the Huns of traditional
history) operate in the region of the Mediterranean. Modern
historians need to consider that the Hunnu/Huns were divided
into two parts. One part supposedly ended up in the Mediterranean
Sea area, and the other· in China.
Recently they have started to c.tll the Huns SI UNN, following
the modern Chinese pronunciation. From this it appears as though
these were a new people.

203
 Serbs, it turns out, also lived in ancient China.
'The Chjnese themselves did not become the conquerors of the
Huns in Asia, but a people, no longer in existence, which is known
under the Chinese name "SYANBI". This names sounds in antiquity
like "Sa'rbi," "Sirbi" and "Sirvi".
So the traditional historians think. But, you see, this is by
no stretch of the imagination some vanished European people,
but the SERBS. The Serbs - Sa'rbi, Sirbi, Sirvi - have been liVing
in the Balkans for centuries, and they do not intend to vanish
without a trace.
Chinese historians are convinced that Tatars and Turks have
dwelt in China since ancient times. "Wan Go Wei thinks that
ZHUBU is the Kidan name TATAR ... Their Turkic speaking
neighbors (blue Turks and Uigurs) called them Tatars; Islamic
authors ... called them the Turks of China".
Rashid-ad-din again noted the fact that Tatars was a collective
name. "Many clans found grandeur and dignity in the fact that
they ascribed themselves to the Tatars and became known under
their name, just as ... other tribes, each of which had its own
proper name, called themselves Mongols from a desire to affiliate
themselves with the glory of the latter".
Thus too arose in Chinese history (on paper) the Tatars, who
afterwards disappeared from the country Without a trace and turned
up by some kind of miracle in the Russian Volga Region.
According to Chinese history, Swedes also lived in the country
- SHIVEY, that is, SVEI. Their country up to now has been called
SWEDEN, but it is located, as is known, in the north of Europe.
The Kidan are well known in Chinel's history. They are
considered descendants of the "Syanbi," that is of the Serbs...
Moreover, the Kidan supposedly belonged to a southeastern branch
of the "Syanbi". It is difficult to shut out of the mind that these
are simply Macedonians. Earlier they sometimes called
Macedonians Southern Serbs. (Anatoly Fomenko).
It is considered that the Kidan founded a state "in China" in
the 10th century A.D.
You will surprise no one with the phrase, "Mongols lived in Ancient
China". Everyone knows this. Modem Mongols have been living there
until now. And modern Mongolia even borders with China. These
Mongols are M.ongoloid and not Indo-European in race.

204
 However, it is becoming clear that the "ancient Mongols"
who live in Ancient China were Indo-Europeans. "According to
the evidence of contemporaries, the Mongols, in contrast with the
Tatars, were a tall, bearded, fair-haired and blue-eyed people"
(Lev Gumilev).
Where then did they go? YOli see, the modern peoples who
today are called Mongols are completely different. The traditional
history is silent. Or it alleges that this bearded, blue-eyed people
was absorbed into a Chinese population which has black hair and
chestnut eyes without leaVing a trace. Credo quia absurdum!
Even the most casual glance at the chronological table of China's
history from the beginning of the Christian Era until the 10th
century A.D. compels one to suspect the parallelism between the
Chinese and Roman histories of that time. This is clear, even
within the framework of the traditional chronology.
Here are several examples.
ROMAN EMPIRE _
The traditional chronology assures us that the famous Roman
Empire arose in the 1st century B.C., having been founded by
Sulla in 83 B.C. From the very beginning of its existence, they tell
us, it declared its ambition to create a worldwide state. This it
attempted to achieve through conquering neighboring peoples and
spreading Roman customs among them.
CHINA _
In the first century B.C. the famous ancient Han empire arises...
"one of the world'~ four empires of antiquity". Its first emperor by
the name of "Wu" ruled in 140-87 B.C. "The aspiration to create a
worldwide empire by conquering neighboring peoples and spreading
Chinese culture to them was the purpose of the Hall dynasty".
One cannot but note the remarkably interesting "name" of the
first emperor who they called simply and modestly - Wu.
ROMAN EMPIRE _
The Roman Empire of SuI la, Caesar and Augustus at first
successfully unified the neighboring lands by conquests. Afterwards,
however, Rome began to undergo defeats. During the rule of Marcus
Aureilius, the Roman Empire collided with strong enemies in the

205
north, in particular with a nomadic tribe on the Danube who were
breaking through the Roman border fortifications. The rule of
Marcus Aurelius (161-180) turned "into a time of brutal wars and
economic impoverishment".
CHINA _
At the same time, the Chinese Han Empire was successfuJly
unifying neighboring lands through conquest. But afterward
difficulties began. "War in the north not only turned out
unsuccessfully, but also entailed China's complete economic
exhaustion. In 184, an insurrection by the "yellow turbans" flared
up in China, which sapped the strength of the Han Dynasty.
ROMAN EMPIRE _
At the start of the 3rd century A.D., the great Roman Empire
concludes its existence in civil warfare and anarchy. The period
217-270 bears in Rome's traditional history the official title
"Political Anarchy of the Middle 3rd Century". This is the time of
the "soldier emperors".
CHINA _
At the same time, in far away China the I-Ian empire also ceases
to exist. The picture of its death exactly duplicates the demise of
the Roman Empire. "The aristocrats took the initiative for
themselves... they were divided and, at the head of individual
armies, entered into conflict with each other and, for the most part,
perished in internecine war. Uneducated, morally corrupt soldiers
came to power".
Historians date the fall of the Han Empire as 220 A.D. - only
3 years later than the fall of the Roman Empire.
ROMAN EMPIRE _
After the collapse of the Roman Empire ill the middle of the
3rd century A.D. power soon falls into the hands of a famous
woman - Julia Maesa, a relative of Emperor Caracalla. She in fact
rules Rome, elevating her proteges to the throne. Finally, they kill
her in an internecine struggle. Her rule is characterized as
exceptionally bloody.

206
CHINA _
Soon after the collapse in the 3rd century A.D. of the Han
empire, a wife of one of emperors, "who was forceful and violent",
comes to power in the country. "She orders the execution of the
head of the government, the father of the empress, the mother and
his three brothers, marking the start of a bloody new epoch with
it", After some time, she was killed. These events are dated in
Chinese history as 291-300.
ROMAN EMPIRE _
In the beginning of the 4th century, Constantine moves the
capital to New Rome and thus in fact founds the Second Roman
Empire - the future BYZANTIUM. ThiS is the famous division of
the Roman Empire into Western - with the capital in Italian
Rome, and Eastern with the capital in New Rome - the future
Constantinople.
CHINA _
And here, in lockstep with Roman history, in the beginning
of the 4th century A.D. (more precisely, in 318) a new dynasty
arises with the name of the Eastern Jin. With this, the Jin Chinese
empire is divided in two: the Western and Eastern Jin. Exactly
as in Rome. And at the same time.
ROMAN EMPIRE _
The Western Roman Empire ends in 476 A.D. with the capture
of Rome by Germans and Goths. This moment is considered the
end of Western Rome. The young Romulus Augustulus was the
last "purely Roman" emperor.
CHINA _
In 420 A.D., the Western Liang, that is Western ROME, was
conquered by Huns.
"The Chinese historiography determined 420 as the turning
point that divided the epochs". The last emperor of Western Liang
(Western Rome) was still very young.

HUNS IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE AND HUNS IN CHINA _

In 460 A.D., the Hunnu in China were destroyed. This event
207
coincides with a strikingly similar example from Roman history.
The parallelism is so glaring that historians note: "And isn't it
strange that in these very same years the very same tragic end
happens to the western branch of the Hunnu, which it is customary
to call Huns ... It is difficult to maintain that the chronological
coincidences were by chance" (Lev Gumilev).
There are also other parallels, just as surprising and striking.
Especially regarding the "Son of Heaven". Le., Christ. In which
connection, Chinese legend gives, in our opinion, a more accurate
dating of his appearance in history - the 11th century A.D.
According to the dating of the adherents of the new chronology,
the activity of John the Baptist, and afterwards Jesus Christ
occurred in the 11th century A.D. An indication of these events
is preserved in the chronicles.
"The Keriat... accepted baptism in 1009... At approximately the
same time, the Turkic speaking Ongut accepted Christianity... the
Oghuz and in part the Chigil were baptized ... Even among the Kidan
themselves and the tribes of Western I'vlanchmia who were subordinate
to them, "some Christian element" was found that gave rise to the
appearance in Medieval Europe of the legend of Prester John".
Most likely, this is a reflection of John the Baptist and the
baptism connected with him - especially since in the beginning of
the 11th century John Crescentius appears in Roman history, who
is one of the reflections of John the Baptist.
And once we see John the Baptist, Christ must appear shortly
after. Thus in the middle of the 11th century A.D. prince YuaMao,
who in 1038 A.D. declared himself the "SON OF HEAVEN",
appears in China. The Son of Heaven was murdered in 1048.
That is, at the same time as Jesus Christ.
And so on.
Before the 15th century, practically all China's history consists
of episodes from Europe's history in a local variants.
Well, but what is there to do with the archaeological evidence,
with that very same Great Wall of China - WAN LI CHANG CHENG
- that they started to build, according to the traditional chronology,
as early as the third century S.c.? No parallels with Europe are
observed here. They did not build three thousand kilometer walls
there. Perhaps it indicates the antiquity of Chinese history?
However, with the wall it is not so simple as it seems at

208
first glance.
The "History of the Ancient World" maintains that "Qin Shi
Huangdi ordered the wall built for the country's protection from
the Hunnu ... A multitude of peasants, serfs, soldiers and the
condemned were gathered for the construction. They built the
wall with towers along China's northern border. The wall's length
is nearly four thousand kilometers, and a width such that five
horsemen can go along it beside each other".
What a muddle with the numbers. it is as if the historians are
not fully certain how many kilometers are in the wall. The fact is
that again in one source the number is given otherwise - almost
six thousand kilometers! And what is more, there is even a second
Great Wall of China. If the first stretches from the Yalu River in
the east to the Tianshan Mountains in the west, then the second is
from the Nengjiang River in the west to the city of Baotou in the
cast, and this stretches more than five thousand kilometers.
In order not to confuse ourselves, we will concentrate on the
first wall - the most famous and, it would seem, the best studied.
The allegation that five horsemen can pass along it alongside each
other has, mildly speaking, been exaggerated. In many places it
rises so steeply, over the peaks of mountains, that it is impossible to
ride along it on horses at all.
And much more is exaggerated. Critics of the traditional
history <Nikolai Morozov) note: "The story about the famous Chinese
wall, which is from 6 to 7 meters high and up to three thick,
extending for three thousand kilometers, started as early as 246
before the start of our era by the Emperor Shihuangdi and finished
only 1,886 years later, by 1620 A. D., is an absurdity which can
convey only annoyance to a serious, thinking historian. You see,
any kind of large structure has an originally intended, practical
purpose... Who would get it into his head to start a huge structure
which could be finished only 2,000 years later, and until then be
only a useless burden to the population ... And for it to be so well
maintained as it is now, the Chinese wall could not be more than
several hundred years old".
They can say that they repaired the wall for two millennia.
But it makes sensc only to repair a not very old structure, otherwise
it ages beyond hope and falls to pieces. Which is what we also
observe, by the way, in Europe. They demolished the old defensive

209
walls and in their place built new, stronger ones.
Just when did they build the wall?
Not earlier than the 15th century A. D. and, of course, not
against the arrows and spears with copper or even stone ti ps of the
3rd century B.C. A stone wall nearly three meters th.ick is not
needed against these. Such walls are needed against firearms.
Similar structures began to be built everywhere when cannon and
siege techniques appeared on the fields of battle.
There are all the reasons to think (Anatoly Fomenko) that the
Great Wall of China was built most likely as a structure which
designates the border between two countries: China and Russia.
Of course, it was thought of as a military-defensive structure, but
hardly used in this capacity in particular. It is senseless to defend
such a wall from an enemy attack.
Today the Chinese wall is located within China. But there
was a time when it designated the country's border. Old maps are
evidence of this. For example, an 18th century map of A<;ia which
was prepared by the Royal Academy in Amsterdam [L'Asie, Dresse
sur les observations de l'Academic Royale des Sciences ct quelques
autres et Sur les memoires les plus recens. Par G. de l'Isle
Geographe. a Amsterdam. Ches R. & J. Ottens, Geographes dans
Ie Kalverstraat au Carte du Monde].
China's northern border on this goes approximately along the
40th parallel. And the wall goes along this border exactly. Moreover,
it is designated as a fat line with the inscri ption, Muraille de la
Chine, that is "China's high wall" in translation from the French.
We see that same Chinese wall and with the same inscription
on it, also on a 1754 map, the Carte de l'Asie. Here the Chinese wall
also goes approximately along the border between China and Great
Tataria, that is Mongolia-Tataria-Russia.
It is important that 18th century cartographers placed the
wall on a political map, and not on any other kind. Consequently,
this wall had the status of a border.
It is portrayed on a color map of the Qing Empire of the
second half of the 17~18th centuries in the academic lO-volume
World History. The Great Wall is drawn in detail here, with all
its minute turns on the terrain. And it goes exactly along the
border of the Chinese empire almost for its whole length.
The assumption might arise that everything happened the other

210
way round: that they fixed the border between Russia and China
in the 17th century along the ancient wall, making it a sort of
convenient coincidence. However, had such been the case, they
would have mentioned the wall a written Russian-Chinese treaty.
There are no such references. Further: at this time border wars
were taking place between Russia and China. (5. Soloviev "A
History of Russia since Ancient Times", volume 12).
Therefore, one may even more precisely show the time of the
construction of the Great Wall of China.
Armed conflicts had been flaring up since the middle of the
17th century. The wars had fluxuating success. Their descriptions
are kept in the notes of the 17th century "explorer and discoverer"
who conquered the Far East, Yerofey Khabarov. The treaty that
fixed China's northern border was concluded in 1689. This means
that one can expect that the Chinese wall to have been built between
1650 and 1689. This expectation is justified. It is known that the
emperor, Bogdykhan Kangxi "began the realization of his plan for
ousting the Russians from the Arnur, having built in Manchuria a
line of fortifications".
In our opinion, it is speaking here about the construction of
the Great Wall of China.
The opinion of researchers that in two thousand years' time
the wall would inevitably fall to pieces recently has received
unexpected confirmation.
It is connected with the cosmos. In books and albums about
the wall it says with pride that one can see it from near-earth
space. But on 15 October 2003, China launched its first ''Taikonaut'',
as they call cosmonauts in that country, into space. The "Shenzhou-
5" shi p with Lieutenant Colonel Van Liwei on board completed
a triumphal fight, showing the whole world that China is a space
power. Yang Liwei landed safely and fell into the hands of
journalists. They asked him whether the Great Wall of China
was visible from space. It turned out that it is not visible. This is
with the fact that modern instruments allow seeing from orbit the
numbers of automobiles on the roads, though not a wall three, and,
perhaps, even five thousand kilometers long.
We have begun to find what is going on. It has turned out
that the local peasants have torn down the wall in many places. It
has become raw material for homes, pigsties and barns. There is no

211
wall! They take the tourists to portions of it that remain. Even
pictures have been published showing that there are heaps of tumbled
rubble now where there once were powerful fortified structures.
All this has happened, supposedly, over the last decades. But
bow does it come to be that the Great Wall, which was standing, as
they assure us, safe and sound for two thousand years, is disappearing
from the face of the earth right now in particular? Perhaps there
has been a dramatic increase in the number of pigsties needed by
modern Chinese peasants? Moreover, bricks which had been in the
wall "for thousands of years" should have crumbled into debris
long ago. They would hardly be trying to salvage these for re-use.
Even the best of bricks last only so long.
But inasmuch as they really are taking apart the Great Wall of
China, despite prohibitions by the authorities, and re-using its
material for various new structures, the conclusion arises: the wall
was erected comparatively recently and the peasants began to
destroy it soon after it had risen above the ground. In order to
pull apart so many bricks, one needs to labor many years.
The "youth" of the wall also is confirmed by the fact that
before the Manchu, there was no monumental construction in China.
The Chinese started to build majestic buildings and structures
only in this time. In order to explain why they were not involved
with it earlier, historians arc resorting to the same "explanations"
which are already well known to us from Europe's "history". It is
becoming widely repeated that, allegedly, in the epoch of the
Manchu-Mangul "Chinese craftsmen did not look for new ways
and returned to the old, forgotten techniques". It turns out in
particular that, in this era, in China there suddenly "appear
descri pUons of various trades and productions from antiquity and
the Middle Ages".
We already are acquainted with such appearances of strange
"revival" in the Sealigerian history. Suddenly supposedly ancient
trades are "revived", ancient texts re-appear and SO on. The same
"theory of revival" appeared when duplicates started to emerge in
the Sea ligerian history which had to be explained somehow.
Therefore, the "return" of the Chinese craftsmen of the Manchu
Empire epoch to the "old forgotten techniques" indicates, most
likely, that in Manchu times these techniques were used or invented
for the first time. Only afterwards, with the extension of Chinese

212
history even deeper into antiquity, was their invention attributed
to fabulous antiquity.
This concerns many things which are considered to have been
genuine Chinese discoveries. For example, paper. Historians maintain,
that the Chinese had been writing their books and chronicles on
paper over two thousand years. However, as of today we have Chinese
chronicles only from as far back as the 17th century. By this time,
paper was already being used widely in Europe. This alone already
casts doubt on the "theory" that the Chinese invented paper so long
ago. Most likely, paper arrived in China from Europe, from
Byzantium, or from Egypt. And along with it the manuscri pts that,
with minor alterations, became "Chinese history".
There is one more important piece of evidence indicating that
paper is a comparatively recent invention. According to the laws
of chemistry, a sheet of paper does not retain its properties for
long. In the Soviet Union during the building of the huge
enterprises, they bricked "time capsules" up in foundations. These
were steel cylinders containing messages addressed to their
descendants. When several years ago they discovered one of the
cylinders which had been buried half a century ago, it turned out
that the paper had been reduced to dust. Oxidation had continued,
even in the solidly soldered vessel.
Now about gunpowder. The Chinese supposedly invented it
in the 9th century A.D. There is information which is evidence of
the fact that gunpowder may have been used by them for military
purposes. In the middle of the 13th century the first "guns" appeared
there, made from bamboo and which shot stones.
The authenticity of these reports is doubtful for the simple
reason that everywhere, when gunpowder has appeared, there has
been a headlong rearming of troops and a radical fe-writing of
the strategies and tactics of warfare. This didn't happen in China,
which carried the use of gunpowder no further than the use of
bamboo "guns". Consequently, there is not any serious production
of gunpowder indicated, making it much more likely that this
explosive substance was carried into China rather than from it. 1n
China it was, and remained, an exotic.
By the way, a number of researchers maintain that the Chinese
were fully able to invent gunpowder, inasmuch as its medieval
reci pe is simple to the utmost. So simple that they were able to

213
invent it where they liked. The monk Roger Bacon writes about it
in the 13th century. "He knew how to make gunpowder, was
suspected of heresy, subjected to prosecution and died in prison".
In the 14th century, the monk Berthold Schwartz describes
the recipe for manufacturing gunpowder. After this,they also began
to build factories for the production of firearms and gunpowder.
So what's so simple about it? The main ingredients of the
explosive mixture are charcoal, saltpeter and sulfur. It isn't any
work to procure sulfur and charcoal, and to get saltpeter, one needs
to dig a three-meter hole and fill it with chicken dung, pig urine
and straw. Having mixed up the explosive mixture, one has to
keep it under a press for a minimum of 20~30 hours.
And the modern British scientist, Robert Smith, did this with
his colleagues in order to ascertain the quality of the medieval
gunpowder. Smith, head of the Royal Armory in Leeds. used
recipes which were preserved from the times of the 14th century.
How surprised the scientists were when they discovered that the
ancient gun fired a lead ball 945 meters with a speed of 200
meters a second, whereas with the use of modern powder this
distance was bettered by only 155 meters. According to Smith,
he did not expect that so simple a procedure for obtaining gunpowder
could give such surprising results.
By all appearances, as Robert Smith maintains, the gunpowder
reci pc was so obvious that it was invented many times over at
various times and in various countrics.
Another of the legends is connected with the invention of the
compass. They ascribe this also to the genius of the Chinese. The
encyclopedia reports:
"They already were using a permanent magnet more than 2,000
years ago in China for determination of the direction of north
and south". (The Great Russian Encyclopedia, 1970-77).
The author of one of the popular books adds:
"A magnificent automatic machine was created in ancient
China that was called "carriage with a figure". which pointed to
the south ... Some traditions relate this invention to the 23rd
century B.C... But in 1960, Doctor Joseph Needham and his
Chinese collaborators... discovered that the most ancient mention
of such a carriage comes from the 3ed century A.D. "(Peter James,
Nick Thorpe "Ancient Inventions").

214
 In the opinion of the authors of this book, the compass worked
thus:

"They apparently carved a scoop from a piece of magnet.

When they placed it on a stone slab with a level polished surface,
it, probably, was turning as long as the "hand" was not pointing
south ... This unusually shaped contrivance, which is called a
SHINANSHA, is mentioned in a book which is dated 80 A.D.,

•
~

•Ii
••
••
li
•
~
•
where other references are contained, it is possible, it goes back as
early as the 4th century B.C."
Modern engineers, staff of the Toronto Science Center (Canada),
have created this instrument according to the descri ptions cited
in the chronicles. Here it is, the Chinese "compass".
And just what is this? It has been settled that a similar
design cannot overcome the moment of friction. The instrument
in no way can have been used for navigational purposes. It either
is a makeshift with which to claim China's priority in the invention

215
of the compass, or is some kind of a contraption of a rou lette type,
used for fortune-telling.
The next design is a compass on a small cart.
As experience has shown, even a touch at one point in ideal
conditions creates a moment of friction, which hinders the turning
of the rather lightweight design. Peter James and Nick Thorpe, by
the way, also reach such a conclusion:
"The human figure was connected to the wheels with a
complex series of gears Such teethed transmissions, known today
as differentials, allow the wheels of an automobile to move at a
different speed. However, as Needham has indicated, a similar
mechanism can work only if every detail was made with the highest
precision ... Not only the wheels, but also the other gears would
have to be made with the highest precision, which allows Needham
to call the carriage the "first cybernetic mechanism in the world".
A reconstruction of the "cybernetic" carriage was presented at
an exhibition at the Science Museum, London.

But all this was proven in our time. Two centuries ago, the
famous German Sinologist, Heinrich Julius Klaproth, wrote to the
no less famous traveler, Alexander von Humboldt, that the polarity
of magnets and the properties of magnetized needles were known
in China as early as 120 years B.C.
"The declination of a needle was well known to the Chinese, and
the use of it for seafaring, in which connection their map was divided
into 24 compass points", he assured Alexander von Hlunboldt, alluding
to Chinese chrollicles. Consequently, they used it for seafaring! But
then, it is not understood why the Chinese had not sailed anywhere

216
over the last millennia, and waited until the Europeans themselves
sailed to them.
First reports about the use of a compass in Europe are contained
in literary sources supposedly of the 12th century (most likely of
the 14th or 15th centuries.) One can understand from the
descriptions that originally sewing needles served as a compass.
With the aid of a piece of magnitite, they were magnetized and
then placed onto a straw or a cork, which was floating in water in
a rouod cup. The needle lined its whole length up at the level of
the meridian and pointed with its ends and north and south.
Only in the 17th century did William Gilbert improve the
method for making a compass: the lightest magnetic needle is set on
a quill. The purpose of the invention is to reduce friction in the
operation of the instrument to the greatest extent possible. The
friction involved is directly proportionate to the weight of the
needle. The Chinese clearly didn't know this. The small boxes
which they show us today as supposedly ancient Chinese compasses
do not work. Modern engineers have tried follOWing Robert Smith
to create a compass according to the Chinese model. Nothing resulted:
the coefficient of friction prevented it.
Nevertheless, the legends about the Emperor Chou Kung, who
lived even morc than I, tOo years B.C. and invented the compass
are widespread. Heinrich Julius Klaproth, true, doubts th.is. He
cites references to the even more "ancient" chronicles where it is
said that the honor of the invention belongs to the emperor Huang-
ti (that is, Huan Di, whose name is one of the European variants of
the name Johann). This Huang-Huan lived 2,300 years before the
new era! In which connection, at first he wasn't determining at all
where north is with the aid of a magnet, but capturing robbers
with iron heads. Wherever they were concealed, the magnet
indicated precisely where they were h.iding. Their heads were so
very massive that they attracted the magnet at any distance, even
hundreds of kilometers. Huang-Huan made military campaigns
which lasted several days in order to catch the robbers unawares
in thick fog. So the chronicles say.
Actually, the marvel is the magnet. The field of modern
magnets (more than 300 oersteds at the maximum) "is dissolved"
in the earth's magnetic field already at a distance of 5-7 meters. If
one is to agree with Henrich Julius Klaproth we have been struggling
217
along, hopelessly behind the ancient Chinese Huan, down to the
present day.
There is one more tale - about the Chinese table of logarithms.
They ascribed it too to the ancient wise men of this country. However,
upon checking it turned out that those very same errors are repeated
in it that are found in the tables published in Holland in 1628.
Finally, about silk. The words "China" and "silk" have been
connected closely in our minds since childhood. Everyone knows
that silk originated in China: Traditional historians say with
complete confidence that silk was invented in China in 2640 B.C.
The precision of this date· the exact year (I) - is worthy of note.
However, that same traditional history establishes that people
produced silk in Europe independently from the Chinese. Where
in particular? Talking about the country of the "Seres", that is,
about China, David Wright answers: "Production of silk began in
the Byzantine Empire in 552 A.D., and it is fully possible that a
more or less correct understanding of the method for obtaining
silk was obtained (in China) from Byzantine sources".
That is, David Wright recognizes that China adopted the
idea for the production of silk from Byzantium. And this was in
the "dark times" of the Middle ages.
By the way, if one admits that they really invented silk in
China nearly five thousand years ago, then a simple question arises:
from where was this known to the Chinese? You s(.'C, they supposedly
invented paper three thousand years after silk, approximately in
105 A.D. Only afterwards were they able to write the history of
their great discovery on it. Bllt until then, it was necessary to
keep, apparently, the precise date in mind over thrcc millennia.
These assertions, it would seem, contradict. plentiful evidence of
the fact that they really received silk in a large quantity from China.
They called it "ser." Supposedly there was the city of Seros far to
the east, and the country, the people and the type of cloth were
named after it. Gallo-Roman writer Sidon ius Apollinaris wrote:
"Therefore, as soon as Rome had become firmly estclblished, all lands
came running to it at once, and every province carrying its own
fruits ... The Seres - silk, the Sabine - incense". A province? Was
China really a province of the Roman (Byzantine) Empire? A
surprising assertion for a writer who supposedly lived in those
times. He described a situation which was characteristic of the
218
Middle Ages.
But be that as it may, one can agree with Sidon ius. They even
named China after the name of the silk - "Country of the Seres".
By the way, Ser means simply "yarn, fleece", Sec vcllera means
"beech yarn." That is the yarn, obtained from the fibers of the
arboreal worm, bears the name "Seres". There are no indications of
the place where silk production was mastered for the first time, the
name docs not contain it.
Silk is valued very dearly. Not so much because of its beauty, as
because it possesses amazing properties. Lice and fleas are not found
in silk garb, and bedbugs avoid it. In the Middle Ages these were
all a most serious problem. Therefore, not only nobility and servants,
but also commoners attempted to obtain such cloth. Trade flourished,
bringing immense profits and attracting most of all state, that is,
Judaic merchants. The Scaligerian historiography recognizes that
Aramaic was the language of intercourse on all the Great Silk Road
from China to Europe.
Trade led to the appearance of new towns and villages on the
Great Road, to the colossal development of interstate communications,
and to the betterment of transportation and banking. Account
books from those times have been found by archaeologists in the
Caucasus, one of the sections of the intercontinental highway. At
the same time, a system of communications arose which provided for
the creation of special intermediate stations on the routes, where it
was possible to rest, change tired horses for fresh and buy provisions.
Local princes and tribal leaders supplied protection to caravans for
payment. In a word, the trade in silk and other exotic goods enabled
the rapid development of all regions along which the Great Silk
Road passed.
It ceased to exist after the collapse of the empire in the 15-16th
centuries, when the Asian rulers had fully subjugated all land routes
to themselves, finishing off the Venetian, Genoese and other trade
houses. Other routes for trade had to be found. At the same time,
development of the scientific and technical fundamentals of ocean
navigation also received a powerful stimulus. Mastery of the world's
oceans, leading to important geographic discoveries in the course of
the search for new routes "to India" and China had begun.
The Great Silk Road had fallen into complete decay. The
countries through which its routes lay fell out of the worldwide
219
trading system, which led to the sharp decline in the pace of their
subsequent development in comparison with the European states.
Asia is feeling the consequences of this to this day. It is noteworthy
that in our time, China and the countries of Central Asia steadily
are reverting to the idea of a revival of the Great Silk Road. And
it promises huge benefits even today.
One would like to repeat again: a significant part of ancient
Chinese history is cobbled-up from fragments of the chronicles of
European, Byzantine and Russian history.
Unfortunately, today there is no success in determining what
really happened ill China previous to the 17th century. The ancient
books were too thoroughly destroyed in the 18th century. Just as
thoroughly as in Europe in the Middle Ages.
It is difficult, of course, to part with the myth of the
tremendous antiquity of China and of the Eastern civilizations in
general. The thought stays with us steadfastly that in those times,
when Europeans in animal hides were keeping warm in caves by
campfires and ri pping half~cooked meat with their teeth, the
Chinese were already wearing silks and sailing the seas with the
help of compasses.
Set·backs to the ultra-respectful attitude towards the "ancient"
Orient continue. In 1956, archaeologists in China discovered the
belt of a soldier with aluminum plates and confidently dated it
from the year 297. Since then, already half a century, traditional
historians have been struggling with the insoluble question: how
20th century technology was able to be used in ancient China.
Everything is subject to doubt; especially the date -determined, as
we see, with the usual incredible precision.
In short, one needs to recognize that civilization in the East is
of no greater antiquity than is civilization in the West. In many
cases, it is younger.

220
HISTORY IN THE PAGES
OFTHEBITB~L'E~~~---~c~HA~rn~R~ffl~El~VE

Believers are convinced that everything written in the pages

of the Bible did in fact occur. For them, the Book of Books is a
holy history, which reveals the origins of world development since
time immemorial. It is not surprising, therefore, that it has become
the main backbone element of Scaliger's religiously oriented
chronology. In a broader sense· the foundation for official history.
Even those who considered and consider themselves free of religious
views steadfastly follow its princi pies, inasmuch as others have
not been created. We all adhere to, for example, the dating proposed
by Scaliger and his followers: before the birth of Christ, or before
the new era, after the birth of Christ, or in the new era.
The bible talks about many events. How authentic are they?
This question occupies the minds of people constantly. Therefore,
from century to century, a search takes place for scientific data
which would confirm the fact of the Bible, a collection of religious
writings. And as of today, quite a lot of such data, at first glance,
has been accumulated. Here are both archaeological finds, and
ancient manuscri pts, and the statements of ancient historians ...
But they are convincing only at first glance. Upon closer
examination, completely unexpected facts become clear.
Let us begin with the most common.
Today the Book of Books in all its variants - Orthodox, Catholic,
and Jewish canons - contains quite a definite collection of texts.
But it is not encountered in such a form earlier than the 16-17th
centuries.
Of course, separate and incomplete books of the modern Bible
existed even earlier by two-three centuries. Some of these
manuscri pts have been maintained up to our time. But, in the
first place, combining all of these does not give us the modern
Bible. And, in the second, even those parts of the Bible which are
found in the manuscri pts of the 14·16th centuries have often existed

221
In other editions.
The compilation itself of a contemporary biblical canon is by
no means ancient, as many, most likely, think. In the New Testament
were, it turns out, the New Testament Joshua (along with the Old
Testament), the New Testament Chronicles (along with the Old
Testament), a certain book "Genealogy", a certain book Jesus
Semiramis, New Testament Paleia, Second Apocalypse, and the like.
And this is evidence of the fact that the Book of Books was
edited from century to century. They inserted something, they
deleted something, and something they re-wrote. And it cannot
have been otherwise, since the political situation was changing
and it was necessary to cite the Bible, the main ideological weapon
of that age, all the time in accordance with the requirements of the
time.
If onc is not to forget about it, then it becomes understandable
why in thc Catholic Church over several centuries, as the traditional
history assures us, it formally was forbidden to read the Bible.
Pope Gregory IX introduced the prohibition supposedly in 1231,
and the Second Vatican Council changed it only in 1962-1965.
That is, in the 20th century! In a Council decree at Beziers
(supposedly 1246 A.D.) it said:
"As regards then the holy books in the popular dialect, allow
them not in the least either for clerics or for laity". In an edict of
Charles IV at the end of the 14th century it says: "Lay people of
both sexes by canon determination are not supposed to read
anything that was written even though in the common language,
so that they do not lapse into heresy and error through bad
comprehension" .
The encyclopedic dictionary "Christianity" reports that in the
epoch of the Reformation, Cardinal Hosius wrote, upon instruction
of the Roman Curia, a treatise on the use of the Bible (Hosius, "De
expresso verba Dei"). It is expressed thus: "To permit the people
to read the Bible means to give the Sdcred writ to the dogs and to
cast pearls before swine".
The Council of Trent (in the 16th century) forbade laity the
reading of "heretic" translations of the New Testament
unconditionally, and permitted the reading of the Old Testament
books only under the supervision of a bishop.
Orthodox Judaism (except the Karaitcs) was in exactly the

222
same position. According to researchers, "Reading of the Bible was
not permitted to the Orthodox Jews; they were able to become
familiar only with the Talmud, which explained antiquated Biblical
laws in a more modern form".
The reading of the Bible was forbidden in the everyday life of
the Orthodox Church, and in general in the East. The prohibition,
in particular, was contained in the "Epistle of the Patriarchs of the
Eastern Catholic Church regarding the Orthodox Faith" of 1723.
The Orthodox Church, which is based (similarly to the Roman
Catholic) fundamentally on the Liturgy, and not on the Holy
Scri pture, has long struggled with the study of the Bible; in the
reign of AJexander I it yried to burn all copies of the first Russian
translation of the New Testament which had been published by
the Bible Society.
Such is the case of all. But reports about prohibitions in the
Middle Ages evoke deep and well-founded doubts. In the first
place, because there was no one to prohibit. As already has been
noted, near-total illiteracy prevailed in the medieval world. Over
the centuries, the ability to read and write remained a privilege of
the clergy and those who were relatively well off. What kind of
talk, then, can there be about "casting pearls before swine"?
In the opinion of the adherents of the new chronology, the
prohibitions were contrived and written as early as the 17-18th
centuries and ascribed to medieval activity in order to explain
the fact that the Bible in the modern sense generally was missing
at least until the 16th century! It still had not been compiled,
edited and approved fully by the church authorities.
How ancient are the oldest Hebrew Bible manuscripts? It was
considered in the 19th century that no such manuscri pts existed
earlier than the 9th century A.D. They attributed the most ancient
Hebrew manuscript, which contained the complete Old Testament
Bible, only to 1008 A.D.
True, a well-known Karaite 19th century learned man, Abraham
firkovich, undertook to refute this assertion. He compiled a library
of the "most ancient" Biblical manuscri pts. And just what did he
find? They turned out to be forged. In OUf time investigations
were made of the manuscri pts from Abraham Firkovich's collection.
The conclusions of Alexander Gertsen and Yuri Mogarichev are
unambiguous:

223
 "Upon reading in infrared and ultraviolet rays it is seen
clearly that the letters of the designated datcs were redone, usually
"tav" was converted as a result of an erasure to "resh", which
essentially has made the original date more ancient".
Let us explain: Hebrew letters are at the same time digits. Therefore.
to change a letter meant to change the dating. But even the forgery
related to the epoch after the middle of the 13th century A.D.
The Qumran manuscri pts arc considered evidence of the
antiquity of Biblical texts. Let us recall briefly the history of
their discovery.
In 1947, a Bedouin, looking for a lost goat, reached into a cave
on a cliff, which lifted to 300 meters above the level of the Dead Sea
along its western shore. He discovered thrcc leather scrolls with
texts written, as the historians note, "with amazingly durable inks".
The fact alone that the scrolls are leather, while not even speaking
of the ink, should have put the historians on their guard. There is
no hide the world that would not disintegrate over the ages, let
alone more than thousands of years. But the historians have not
been put on their guard.
They started to guess about when the manuscri pts were written
and who concealed them. They called for help on the "ancient"
author Pliny the Elder, who wrote the well-known "Natural History"
supposedly in the first century A.D. That is, exactly in that epoch
to which they intended to "date" the Qumran manuscri pts. The
"ancient" author had written: "On the west side of the Dead
Sea... is the solitary tribe of the Essenes... no women ... no money ...
only palm-trees for company".
Naturally, the scientific world decided that the Essenes.
menlioned by Pliny, also were the inhabitants of Khirbet-Qumran,
where there are no palms on the shores of the Dead Sea, not even
grass will grow there. Pliny the Elder clearly didn't know this,
but they forgave him the small mistake. The Christian manuscri pts,
found later in those very same locations, would be able to give far
more information, but they did not interest the scientists, since
they considered them to have been written much later.
Meanwhile, the manuscri pts, which were written in Hebrew,
are extremely interesting. as also are the old ruins discovered
approximately a kilometer to the south of the Qumran caves. The
excavations showed that there had once been a monastery here.

224
But the archaeologists were not able to say the word "monastery"
aloud. Tn the first place, because the Sea ligerian history thinks
that the J udaeans had no monasteries. And in the second place,
because monasteries are known in the Sea ligerian history of the
church only starting from the 3-4th centuries A.D.
The Scaligerian chronology literally compelled the scientists
to date the Qumran manuscri pts at the start of our era
notwithstanding that there are New Testament texts among the
Qumran manuscripts, which was impossible in the first century.
So, one needs to recognize that these manuscri pts also cannot
serve as evidence of the Bible's antiqUity.
It is assumed that its canon was established by the Council of
Laodicea supposedly in 363 A. D. However, no documents of this
and other early councils were preserved. In reality, then, the canon
is considered offiCially established only from the time of the Council
of Trent, which was convened in 1545 and lasted (with breaks)
until 1563. Disputes and the struggle of various groups at the
council around the Biblical canon lasted nearly 17 years! We
emphasize: at the end of the 16th century.
The Council of Trent not only approved the canon of the
Bible. On its orders they compiled the sadly famous "Index of
Forbidden Books", and destroyed a mass of writings which were
recognized as apocryphal, in particular, the "Annals of the Judaic
and Israelite Kings". We will never read these books. One can
maintain for certain: they were destroyed because they described
history not as it was set forth in the books of the victorious factions.
In which connection, the Apocrypha "were many times greater
than the writings recognized as canonical" (Yakov Lentsman
"Origin of Christianity").
They damned and destroyed the authors, too. There is a
note opposite many names in the index: dannato autore, which
means, "damned author", that is, an author, damned by the Roman
church. Not only books, but also names of authors went forever
into non-existence.
There is one more reason for which the books of the Bible cannot be
a reliable source of reliable historic information. J. Sunderland has
written aoout it in the work, 'The Holy Books in the Ught of Science":
"From the very first steps of our research on the original
language of the Old Testament, we encountered a fact of huge,

225
even amazing significance. The fact consists in that the Hebrew
written language originally did not have either vowels or signs
that change them ... The books of the Old Testament were written
with only consonants".
The situation, it is necessary to say, is typical not only for the
Old Testament. The ancient Slavonic text also is a chain of
consonants, sometimes even without "vocalization symbols" and
division into words. Even the "ancient" Egyptian texts, as we
al ready have said, were written with on ly consonants.
True, if we now take a Hebrew Bible, then we will find in it a
framework of consonants which are filled with dots and other
symbols, which indicate the missing vowels. However, these symbols
did not constitute an attribute of the ancient Bible. it is assumed
that "this serious defiCiency was eliminated not earlier than the
7th or the 8th century A.D. (in fact, somewhat later), when the
Massorites (Massoretes) edited the Bible and "added ... symbols
which indicated vowels; but they had nothing to go on besides
their own judgment and a very imperfect tradition; this does not
constitute secrets for any connoisseur of Hebrew".
When in the 16th and 17th centuries, Levita and Capellus in
France proved that the vowel symbols were introduced only by
the Massoretes, this rocked all Protestant Europe. It showed many
that the new theory subverted religion fully. You see, if the vowel
symbols were not the work of a divine revelation, but only by
human invention and of a later time besides, then how could one
rely on the text of the writing? ... "The debates were some of the
hottest in the history of the new Biblical criticism and lasted
more than a century" (j. Sunderland).
If then there is no one, correct vocalization, then different
vocalizations of one and the same term will appear.
But perhaps archaeology is in a condition to help in this
overly important pursuit? Archaeologists work incessantly in the
territory of the Middle East. The well-known archaeologist L.
Wright, a devoted adherent of the Scaligerian dating of Biblical
events, disappoints us:
"The tremendous majority of finds proves nothing and refutes
nothing; they fill in the background and allow a setting for
history ... Unfortunately, much work has been permeated with the
wish to 'prove' the Bible which is accessible to the average reader.

226
The evidence is used incorrectly, and the conclusions drawn from
it is in error" ...
The Scaligerian history ascribes the activity of the Biblical
patriarchs to modern Mesopotamia and Syria. However,
archaeology says the following: "As regards the personality of the
patriarch Abraham, Isaac and Jacob themselves, then one only can
repeat that the results of the digs in Syria and Mesopotamia have
given the poorest results about them - to put it simply, nothing"
O. Kryvelev "Excavations in Bible Countries").
So it is appropriate to ask: is it correct to search for traces of
the patriarchs in modern Mesopotamia?
Werner Keller thinks that: "Egypt witl remain indebted to
researchers. Not only have they not found anything about Joseph,
but they have not discovered either documents or monuments of
his time".
The Biblical scholar and historian Martin Noth maintains
directly that there are no grounds to attribute the demolished
settlements being discovered by archaeologists in modern Palestine
to an Israeli conquest of the Promised Land.
Things stand no better with the traditional localization of
New Testament events near modern Jerusalem. There are no
archaeological confirmations of the dating of the New Testament.
This is explained by the fact that supposedly in 66-73 A.D.,
Jerusalem in Palestine was destroyed totally and "it was forbidden
for the Judaeans... to go near it". It is thought that afterwards
the settlement of EI-Khuds (the local name) arose here, which also
is called Aelia Capitolina. And only afterwards, over time, "did
ancient Jerusalem reappear" here, gradually.
Archaeologists are at a loss. "The historic remains of Biblical
times" such as the Wailing Wall do not have any archaeological
and historic confirmations.
There are confirmations of another nature. At the beginning
of 2004, reports appeared that the Wailing Wall is being destroyed.
Several blocks had fallen from it. Some have proposed that a
small earthquake influenced it. However, it was so light that many
residents of Jerusalem did not notice it. Others found the reason
in the fact that on the Temple Mount construction work and
movement of earth had told upon the Wall. Also unconvincing.
Today in many cities of the world, literally alongside buildings,

227
metro lines are being built. But this is not destroying the buildings
above them.
Wouldn't it be simpler to propose that the Wailing Wall was
built, according to historic measures, fairly recently, and the natural
process of its aging is ongoing? Nothing lasts forever.
It is not only atheistically inclined authors who recognize
that the Bible will not yield to a sober analysis of authenticity.
"If one is to free the Bible of myths and legends, then everything
that remains after this operation, that is the real facts, will fit on a
single post card". So Professor of Theology, R. Bultsher, has said
about the Holy Book.
In the opinion of theologists, it is necessary to understand
allegorically the Biblical tales and lessons, as too the historic books
included in it.
For example, the English theologian CH Dodd analyzes Biblical
text about the fact that the prophet Samuel orders King Saul in
the name of God:
"Now go and smite Amalek and, and utterly destroy all that
they have... do not spare them, but kill both man and woman,
infant and suckling". (1 Samuel, 15:3).
It would seem a completely clear order, the more so that it
says further how it was executed. Saul "utterly killed all the
people with the edge of the sword", but he left the king of the
Amalekites, Agag, alive and thereby caused an awful anger in God
and his prophet.
However, CH Dodd's "moral" feeling is outraged at the literal
interpretation of this text. Such an order is inhumane! Therefore,
it has to be understood in some other sense than as it is said in the
Bible. The Amalekites as not Amalekites at all, and the women
and children not as women and children at all. These must be
"the spiritual forces of evil", which are found in our heart. We are
in an irreconcilable struggle with them and are supposed to destroy
them. "With such a perception, the whole narration not only becomes
innocuous, but attains a didactic quality", C.H. Dodd thinks.
We will not argue regarding the didactic quality. But then
what, in that case, is one to make of the campaigns, battles and the
mass of realistic details that are mentioned in the Bible? Here arc
iron chariots, combat tactics and detailed descri ptions of how
many soldiers and their gear. Is it necessary to understand this

228
allegorically also?
One can put the question more broadly: if the Bible is allegorical,
then from what source comes its many convincingly concrete
episodes and details? The new chronology answers thus: the Bible's
authors lived in the Middle Ages and described real events. Hence
their concrete nature. But afterwards the descri ptions were
attributed to ancient days according to the laws of Rhistoric cycles",
in order to serva as evidence of antiquity.
Traces of the Middle Ages are scattered among all the texts of
the Old and New Testaments.
Let us recall the story of Moses and the exodus of the Israelites
from Egypt, or (in Hebrew), Mitzrim. A large host, consisting of
the troops from all 12 tribes, is being sent on a distant military
campaign. They call it directly the irregulars (Exodus 12:17). At
the head is a military leader by the name of Moses. The goal of the
campaign is the conquest of the Promised Land.
There are two layers in the legend about Moses. In one he is
presented as the descendant of Abraham. In our view, this is in
order to show succession in a series of patriarchs. According
to circumstances, he received an Egyptian education and became a
priest of the cult of Osiris· the Egyptian god of fertility. But
once, while taking the part of a monotheist, he killed an Egyptian
and was forced to flee the country. In the home of Jethro on the
shore of the Red (Reed) Sea, Moses wrote his famous Book of
Genesis (Sefer Bereshith). And here he received his first revelation
from God, and also the gift of miracle·worker.
The revelation obliged Moses to lead the People of Israel
from Egypt into Palestine. And he led them. The legend says
that during the great migration of the flock of Moses they more
than once betrayed him and God. The Israelites, who missed the
fish and meat in fat Egypt, revealed themselves to be unstable in
faith. Moses before his death even had a prophetic vision from
which he learned that these people again will change his law in
the future. He saw the crimes of the Israelite kings and the outrages
upon the temples; he saw his Books, which were not understood
and perverted by the high priests, interpreted for the vilest purposes;
he saw the later prophets who were persecuted and killed by the
Israelites. And then he cursed them, punishing them with eternal
banishment and forbidding his own confidants to reveal the most

229
secret part of his teaching. He communicated this part only to
seventy chosen, the most faithful of his followers.
The legend is eVidently of medieval origin. It was born in
particular when the persecutions of the Jews began after the break-
up of the empire of the monotheists. It was supposed to explain the
reasons for such persecutions. There are all the grounds to assume
that its author is well-known. The rarest event ill history! According
to one of the versions, the legend of Moses was communicated orally
from generation to generation, until Moses de Leon published it in
the Middle Ages. According to the other version, Moses de Leon
himself wrote the Book of Brightness, having taken as its basis the
written part of the orally communicated Cabbala.
The word Cabbala itself in Hebrew means "tradition".
The second layer in Exodus, and this means also in the form
of Moses, is connected with those events that happened during
the forty years' campaign to the Promised Land.
The start of a campaign with a length of forty years begins
with a miracle ~ the crossing of a sea as if on dry land. Reading its
magnificent description,you immediately remember that the Bible,
as we have already noted, calls this Sea not the Red, but the Reed.
The reed does not grow in the sea, only in the swamps. And for
crossing a reed swamp, even a huge one, no miracle is needed. It is
enough to find paths which are capable of sustaining the weight of
people who are not too loaded down. The iron chariots of the
pursuers without fail will be swallowed into the mire and bog.
Which is what is described in the Bible.
If one is to remember when iron appeared in everyday life,
then the following conclusion suggests itself: the campaign occurred
in the epoch of the production of steel and the creation of a military
cavalry, which was brought to Egypt for the first time by foreign
conquerors. And this was in the Middle Ages.
it is a question of iron too in one of the verses of Deuteronomy:
"As when a man goes into the forest with his neighbor to cut
wood, and his hand swings the axe to cut down a tree, and the
head sli ps from the handle and strikes his neighbor so that he
dies: he may flee to one of these cities and save his life" ...
(Deuteronomy 19:5)
Not only does the iron axe draw attention to itself (goodness
only knows how it got to Biblical times) but also the forest, where

230
one can cut wood. It is doubtful that the deserts of Palestine have
seen forestsin millenia. Deuteronomy is talking about some other
place on Earth.
In "Revelation" we read about glass, as clear as crystal
(Revelation 21: 18; 21:21; 15:2; 4:6). It becomes immediately
understandable that the most probable dating of this verse is to
some time around 1480 or later: no one knew how to make glass as
clear as crystal before the middle of the 15th century.
One of the parables from the Gospel of Matthew is curious. In
it, the Kingdom of Heaven becomes like the master of a house "who
went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard"
(chapter 20:1).
Researchers have conducted a sociological analysis of what
happed further: "After agreeing with the laborers for a denarius a
day, he sent them into his vineyard" (20:2). Consequently, payment
for labor is by the day. "And going out about the third hour he
saw others standing idle in the marketplace" (20:3). That is, there
was a market or a labor exchange where people waited for hire.
And this is in an epoch of slave holding?
"Going out again about the sixth hour and the ninth hour, he
did the same. And about the eleventh hour he went out and
found others standing; and he said to them: "Why do you stand
here idle all day? They said to him, because no one has hired us ...
(ibid. 5-7).
When in the evening the owner had settled up, he paid everyone
the same, although some had worked all day and others - one hour.
Naturally, the first protested. The logic of the hired laborers is
understood: if you have done more, then you also receive more.
Before us, then, is the first experience of tbe struggle for the fair
payment of hired labor. Not of slaves, nor of serfs. And at that,
payment with money - with denarii - is unambiguous evidence
that fully-developed commodity-money relations already existed.
This in turn means, the production of money as a means of payment,
its rate of exchange on the financial market and the like. At the
start of the New Era!
And another thing: what clock did the owner use? According
to the text it turns out that there were 24 hours in a day, and in a
lighted day· 12. That is the modern calculation of a day's time
for us. Meanwhile, as early as the end of the 17th century, for

231
example, only 17 hours were counted in the days in Christian
Moscow. It was Czar Peter the Great who introduced the 24-
hour calculation of daily time! (Igor Davidenko, Yaroslav Kesler
"The Book of Civilization").
This became possible thanks to the fact that chronometers had
appeared, very complex mechanisms with an hour hand. There
wasn't even a mention of them until the Middle Ages. Water and
sand clocks - clepsydra were used, according to which it is impossible
to determine what time it is now. As early as the early Middle
Ages, thc English kings determined how much time had passed, by
candles: they lit them one after the other and, inasmuch as they
were approximately the same, they burnt for equal intervals of time.
The most ancient clocks that have reached us are in the towers
of the Salisbury (England, 1386) and Rouen (France, 1389)
cathedrals. The first hand*held watches were designed in Italy,
France, England and Germany.
Clocks with pendula were invented in 1657. The famous
Christian I-Iuygens did this. He reported on his discovery in the
composition The Clock (I-Iorologium, 1658). And chronometers
with second and minute hands appeared only in the 18th century.
That is the history of clocks. Therefore, we shall repeat the
question: What chronometer did the owner of the vineyard use in
Gospel of Matthew which is considered to be among the most
ancient of books in the New Testament?
It is not always correct to accusc the authors and editors of the
Bible of intentional distortion of the facts. On balance, they were
firmly convinced that iron chariots, shod horses and clocks and
money• had existed in the life of mankind since ancient times. So
they wrote about them in the tales of the legendary olden times.
The so-called apocrypha arc extremely interesting. The "Book
of Enoch" and the "Book of Jubilees" especially stand out.
Enoch is a well known figure. The Canonical Bible reports
that "Enoch lived sixty*five years and became the father of
Methuselah ... Thus all the days of Enoch were three hundred
sixty five years". (Genesis 5:21-23). He lived so early then that
no one knew anything about Noah, let alone about Abraham. He is
Noah's ancestor.
Just what did he write about in his book which was not worthy
of the honor of inclusion into the canon? About the fact that the

232
angel en lightener Phanuel taught people writing with inks and the
use of paper. A second angel, Gadreel, "showed the children of men
both the coat-of-mail and the shield and the sword for battle". The
word "atmosphere" is not in his book, but it is written about, that it
is "a portal of hail and hoar-frost. a portal of fog and a portal of rain
and dew". Very correct for those times.
Enoch also knew where the rivers flow: "And two of them
come from the north to the sea, and empty their water into the
Erythraean Sea in the east." That is, he marvelously has looked at
the sides of the world, knew their names and also the names of the
seas which had appeared across the chasm of the centuries in the
Middle Ages.
No less interesting is the "Book of Jubilees." Especially such
lines: "We brought, according to the word of God, unto Adam all
the beasts, and all the cattlc, and all the birds, and everything that
moves on the earth, and everything that moves in the water,
according to their kinds, and according to their types" ...
Consequently, the author had investigated the foundations of
the classification of the animal kingdom . which such prominent
scientists as Edward Wotton and Konrad Gesner had only begun
to do in the 16th century; in the 18th century Carl Linnaeus
completed "A System of Nature" (Systema Naturae). A hierarchy of
categories was established in its tenth edition - phylum, class, order,
family and species. Just when did the author of the book live?
But let us return to Moses' campaign.
The gift of the Torah on Mount Sinai occupies a central place
In Exodus.
"And the Lord said to Moses, 'Lo, I am coming to you in a
thick cloud ... upon Mount SinaL .. when the trumpet sounds a
long blast, (when the cloud goes away from the mountain), they
shall come up to the mountain·· ... There were thunders and
lightnings, and a very thick cloud upon the mountajn (Sinai), and
a very loud trumpet blast... And Mount Sinai was wrapped in
smoke, because the Lord descended upon it in fire; the smoke of it
went up like the smoke of a kiln, and the whole mountain quaked
greatly. And as the sound of the trumpet grew louder and louder"
(Exodus, 19).
"All the people perceived the thunderings and the lightnings and
the sound of the trumpet and the mountain smoking" (Exodus 20).

233
 "You stood ... at Horeh ... while the mountain burned with
fire to the heart of heaven, wrapped in darkness, cloud and doom"
(Deuteronomy). (4:9-12).
We see on the screens of the television eruptions of volcanoes
like these in particular when they happen on our planet. The
television reporters need not contrive the texts of their
commentaries; they need only open the Bible and read.
The destruction of the Biblical cites of Sodom and Gomorrah
already has been attributed by historians to the result of a volcanic
eruption:
"Then the Lord rained on Sodom and Gomorrah brimstone
and fire... and 10, the smoke of the land went up like the smoke of
a furnace" (Genesis, 19;24,28).
Here is a list of "volcanisms" in the bible, compiled by V. P.
Fomenko and T.G. Fomenko: Genesis (19:18,24), Exodus (13:21,
22), (14: 18), (20:15), (24:15, 16, 17), Numbers (14:14), (21:28),
(26: 10), Deuteronomy (4: 11,36), (5: 19,20,21), (9: IS,
21), (10:4), (32:22), II Samuel (22: 8-10,13), I Kings (18:38,
39), (19:11, 12), II Kings (I: 10-12, 14), Nehemiah (9: 12, 19),
Psalms (Psalm 11 :6, Psalm 106:17, Psalm 106:18), Ezekiel (38:22),
Jeremiah (48:45), Lamentations (2:3), (4: 11), Isaiah (4: 5), (5:25),
(9:17,18), (10:17), (30:30), Joel (2:3, 5,10).
The attribution of these descri ptions to the traditional Mount
Sinai is at the least strange: thismountain was never a volcano.
Where then did these events occur?
Let us look at a map of the Mediterranean vicinity. The only
powerful, volcanic zone active up to now is in Italy (Sicily).
Vesuvius storms here from time to time. At its foot is the famous
Pompeii, destroyed by an eruption (the "capital" Jeremiah
mentioned?) and two destroyed cities: Stabia (Sodom?) and
Herculaneum (Gomorrah?) It is impossible not to note some
similarity of the names.
The scientist Nikolai Morozov performed an analysis in which
he examined the unvocalized Bible text from the perspective that
Sinai (Horeb) might originally have been in Italy.
Let us cite examples from among what he found: "The Lord
our God ... said to us in Horeb... 'You have stayed long enough
at this mountain ... turn and take your journey... to the land of
the KNUN"(Dcuteronomy 1:8). Theologans vocalize KNUN as

234
"Canaan" and ascribe this to the desert on the shores of the Dead
Sea, but another vocalization is possible: KNUN might also be
Kenua instead of Genoa (that is, the Genoese area in Italy.)
The Bible: "the land of the Canaanites, and LBNUN"
(Deuteronomy 1:7).
Theologists vocalize LBNUN as Lebanon. However, LBNUN
means "white", (as does Mont Blanc - the White Mountain).
The Bible: "And we set out from Horeb, and went through all
the great and terrible wilderness" (Deuteronomy 1:19). Actually,
the famous Phlegraean Fields are located alongside Vesuvius~Horeb.
These are vast, burnt-out spaces, filled with small volcanoes,
fumaroles and stratifications of lava.
The Bible: "And for many days we went about Mount Seir", Seir
has been left without translation by the theologians, but if translated,
then we get: Devil's Mountain. And in particular such a mountain is
located beyond Lake Geneva, Diablereux - the Devil's Mountain.
The Bible: "Go over the brook ARNN" (Deuteronomy 2: 14).
In synodal translation: Arnon. But there is an Italian river Arno
which exists to this day!
The Bible: "and went to Bashan" (Deuteronomy 3:1). The
city of Basshan, or Vashan, is referred to constantly in the Bible.
It is striking that the city of Basshan (Vasshan) is closely similar
to Bassano - which exists in Lombardy to thIs day.
The Bible: "and the king of the Bashan came out against us ...
at Edrei" (Deuteronomy 3: 1). But Edrei exists to thIs day and in
particular under this name, close to the mouth of the Po. The Po
River, incidentally, often called the Jordan - Eridanus - by Latin
authors (see for example, Procopius).
The Bible: "And we took all his cities ... sixty cities"
(Deuteronomy 3:3-4). Actually, there were very many large cities
in this area in the Middle Ages. Verona, Padua, Ferrara, Bologna...
The Bible: "For only Og the king of Basshan was left... behold
his bedstead (here: grave) was a bedstead of iron; is it not in
Rabbah?" (Deuteronomy 3:11) Here not only is Ravenna (Rabbah)
named, but also the famous tomb of Theodoric the Great, which is
located in Ravenna! And so forth and so on.
Thus, everything points to the fact that part of the events
described in the Bible, and in particular, the exodus of the Israelites
led by Moses and the subsequent conquest of the "Promised Land"

235
headed by Joshua, occurred not in Palestine, where there was not
even one large town, but in the Balkans, in Italy and Switzerland.
The city Sian has been located here to this day, and other "Biblical"
cities as well.
Moses died on the campaign, and Joshua the son of Nun (Navin)
continued his cause. And he killed thirty kings during the conquest
of the Land of Israel, including the father of the Armenian king
Shobach. The Armenian king had gathered a great army, but
nothing was of any help to him, "Joshua smashed the forces of the
Armenians" .
How does it come to be that there are so many kings in Israel?
And what was an Armenian king doing there? What did he lack
in his native Armenia? It isn't necessary to ascribe to him that of
which he didn't even dream. Joshua came to him to conquer the
lands, descending toward the south via the shore of the Black Sea.
As regards the personalities of lvloscs and Joshua, the adherents
of the new chronology think fully earnestly that they are
generalized literary figures. The name Moses (MSHE) itself means
Messiah, Redeemer, and Joshua, Yeoshua bin-Nun is Savior. By the
way, other Biblical heroes also have names which correspond to
their roles in history. Abraham is the Father of the People, Isaac is
the Spreader of Letters, Jacob is the Follower of God, Aaron is the
Enlightener. .. Complete and utter literature. The features and
biographies of several real leaders of that same empire that was
created in the Middle Ages are re-packaged as its heroes.
Until now we have been talking about individual details, names
and titles in the Bible. The adherents of the new chronology
(Anatoly Fomenko) have made a comparative analysis of it with
the history pages of the Middle Ages, both real and imaginary, and
have revealed surprising parallels.
Here are some of them.
BIBLE _
After the conquest of the Promised Land by the Israelites and
after the death of Joshua (judges 2:8), those who rose up against
God had to go to war with Moab <Judges 3:12, 28-31). At that
time, those who rose up against God already had seltled in a new
place and founded a city.

236
MIDDLE AGES _
In the imaginary 7th century A.D., in precise coordination
with the Bible, supposedly in 673 A.D., Moab attacks New Rome.
BIBLE _
"And the Lord strengthened Eglon the King of Moab against
Israel. .. and went and defeated Israel; and they took possession
of the city of palms <Judges 3:12-13).
This name is practically identical with PALMIRA.
MIDDLE AGES _
"Moab does not hesitate to attack Constantinople itself. In
673, a huge Arab fleet appeared outside Constantinople... For 5
years, the Arabs persevere in their attempts to seize the capital of
the empire." At the same time the Arabs - Moab - captured the area
where the legendary Palmyra is located.
BIBLE _
Israel is victorious over Moab: "And they killed at that time
about ten thousand ... So Moab was subdued that day under the
hand of Israel" <Judges 3:28-30).
MIDDLE AGES _
New Rome is victorious over Moab, supposedly in the 7th
century A.D.: "Moab was forced to conclude a 3D-year peacc, in
which connection they pledged themselves even to payout a
small tribute to the Eastern Roman government".
BIBLE _
Ahimelech is killed dllring the siege by him of the city of
Thebez (Judges 9). He dies in a battle on a city street.
MIDDLE AGES _
Pyrrhus dies during the siege of the city Argos. He dies in a
battlc on a city street.
BIBLE _
A woman . a resident of Thebez observed the battle from a
tower window, which was besieged by Ahimelech's forces {Judges
237
9:5t·53). "Abimelcch came to the tower, and fought against it...
And a certain woman threw an upper millstone upon Abimelcch's
head and crushed his skull". (Judges 9:53). Abimelech was
mortally wounded.
IMAGINARY MIDDLE AGE,,,S _
An old woman resident "looked at the battle (from the window
of a home) and, having seen that her son had entered combat
with Pyrrhus... tore a tile from the roof and threw it with both
hands at Pyrrhus. The tile struck him in the head beneath the
helmet and broke a vertebra at the base of the neck". Mortally
wounded, Pyrrhus falls from his horse.
BIBLE, _
In all the Bible there is not one other hero military leader who
was killed by a piece of stone thrown at him by a woman. In all of
"ancient" Greek and Roman history there also is not one other
military leader killed in that same way. In front of us we have one
and the same event, as told by different authors in different
languages.
BIBLE -,---,---,--- _
Although Abimelech is mortally wounded, he is still alive and
"called hastily to the young man his armor-bearer, and said to
him: "Draw your sword and kill me, lest men say of me: "A woman
killed him". And his young man thrust him through, and he
died" (Judges 9:54).
IMAGINARY MIDDLE AGE,,,S _
Although Pyrrhus is mortally wounded, he is still alive. A
certain Zopyrus approached him, "Pyrrhus gave him a terrible look,
so that Zopyrus was frightened; his hands trembled ... but being
full of alarm and confusion ... it was only slowly and with
difficulty that he severed the head". Thus does Plutarch describe
the death of Pyrrhus.
BIBLE _
After the death of Abimelech, the battlc stopped immediately
(Judges 9:55).

238
IMAGINARY MIDDLE AGE"-S _
After the death of Pyrrhus, the battle stopped immediately.
BIBLE _
Solomon is a great law-maker and sage. "So that Solomon's
wisdom surpassed the wisdom of all the people of the east and all
the wisdom of Egypt (Mitzrim). For he was wiser than all other
men" (J Kings 4:30-31). The wisdom of Solomon and his activity
as a law-maker is posed by the Bible on a level with similar
characteristics of Moses. No onc else is described by such words
in the Bible.

IMAGINARY MIDDLE AGE"-S _

There are two famous law-makers, Justinian I and Diocletian.
Justinian was the author of a widely known code of laws - the
Justinian code, or the Mosaic laws, or the Code of Diocletian.
Besides these duplicates - Diocletian and Justinian - none of the
rulers in Roman history were regarded in such an exaggerated
manner as great law-makers and sages.
BIBLE _
Solomon is considered the author of some Biblical texts. For
example, the Proverbs.

IMAGINARY MIDDLE AGE"-S _

Justinian I is considered the author of well known literary
works - The Novels, compiled in one collection supposedly
near 534 A. D.
BIBLE _
Solomon is the only Biblical king with whose name the Bible
connects the construction of the famous House of the Lord, that is,
the Lord's Temple (I Kings 6: 1 and more).
IMAGINARY MIDDLE AGES, _
Justinian I restores (or raises?) the well-known and
magnificent Saint Sofia cathedral in New Rome, unique in Roman-
Romean history.

239
BIBLE.~ ~

The Temple of the Lord is described in the Bible as an

exceptionally magnificent structure. No other structure is described
by the Bible with such admiration.

IMAGINARY MIDDLE AGES"- _

The Temple of Saint Sofia is known as a grandiose and splendid
structure. It is described by Procopius and other chroniclers.
Preserved to this day, this temple is one of the greatest creations of
ancient architecture. Its construction is considered the most
prominent event in the architectural history of New Rome
(supposedly of the 6-10th centuries A.D.).
Bul it does not follow, of course, that the temple of Saint Sofia,
as we see it today, was built in the 6th century A.D. The legends
of Justinian I, most likely, are reflections of significantly latcr real
events - not earlier than the 10-I!th centuries A.D. Suleiman,
who ruled in Istanbul in the 16th century A.D., made the main
contribution to the erection of this temple. Let us note, by the
way, the practical identity of the names: SOLOMON and
SOLlMAN (as they wrote the name SULEIMAN earlier).

B1BLE~ _
As a result of a war with Assyro-Babylonia, the famous temple
of Solomon was completely destroyed and ransacked in Jerusalem.
The Bible devotes much space to this plunder, describing in detail
what was captured by Nebuzaradan and Nebuchadnczzar:
"And he burned the house of the Lord ... And the pillars of
bronze that were in the house of the Lord, and tbe stands and the
bronze sea that were in the house of the Lord, the Chaldeans broke
in pieccs, and carried away the bronze to Babylon: And they took
away the pots, and the shovels, and the snuffers, and the dishes for
incense and all the vessels of bronze used in the temple service: the
firepans also, and the bowls. What was of gold the captain of the
guard took away ... and what was silver: As for the two pillars, the
one sea, and the stands, which Solomon had made for the house of
the Lord; the brass of all these vcssels was without weight" (II
Kings 25:9, 13-16).

240
Map of JeflJS8lem. Chronicle of Robert the Rhenish Monic. 13th century. UppsaJa
Sweden. Evsrything is a sacred place on the map. Nofhmg has been destroyed.
 The Japanese calligrapher and laacher
Kampo Harada considers himself a
descendant oj lhe Zevufuo tObe. The
photograph was taken al his home,
agalfl$l the background 01 a shnoo,
Kyoto

Picture o( the Md of XV century, That lime Homer was considered as

Ii sighted person. He even °dldn~ bllfldo in htstonan's WOf'ks.

'Council in Troy".
Vergilius Vaticanus.
Library 01 VatlCBn, 1600
Homer's heroes dress
foppishly in knightly
armors.
Coliseum

capitol.
ReconstructJon.
Museum 01 the Roman
aviJizafJon. Italy.
n was afJ1lSt's L
DjIstnondI vISIOn.
If is a fabrrcMIon on
the gM!IIn rheme.
 The typical amphora has a narrow, high
neck, WIdened below. At the 58mB tune,
the thICkness of the walls is nearly
uniform in a/l its places. There are no
traces of processing with 8 hard
Instrument on the surface. Archaeologists
COfMnce us that these amphoras were
dnlled out But how IS II possible to driN
amphora from dionte rhrough the narrow
neck so that the thickness of the walls IS
the same everywhere? And so that even on
the inner surface traces of the drill do not
remam? Egyptologists maintain /hal a
craftsman spent aR his fife m the
manufacture of one such amphora The
absurdity that is ca/lsd upon at lilly price
to defend the settled notIOnS. TfIB dnlhng
of a dIonte amphora through 8 narrow
neck even with the aid of modem diamond
Instruments is an overly complex task,
technologically.

"- 1M sun god, the supreme defty of the PanIfJ$on. the

personlfic8bon of the daytune sun (evening is AtLm,
momlflg Is Khepri.) Some/lmes he bore /tie name Ra·
Atum·Kttepri, which combined the names of IfIB momJng,
setting and daytime sun, The father of the gods. The
name Ra was a component part of the pharaoh's name,
SIrlC6 he bore /he &11e the son of Ra The first of the
gods Which ItJIed on earth in primordial limes.
HettJte lion adams gate
of Bogazkel
Banner of the Nednga;Jovsk Cossack company (17" Cfmtury).
The Cossacks put onto their own banner both a GYOSS and 8 Moslem crBS08llt moon, and ten
representa/kvl:s 0( the Star of David. Origirlary the C1BSC6flt moon was 8 syrrtJol 0( mHitary
1"Sbf. The Star 0( DavKJ is a syrOOoI of nJO/'JOtheISm.

A group 0' Cossack banners of 8 Kiev8n regtment elsa 0 ~ 17th century. ("HIStOry of
the Cossacks oJ
 The Grear WaN of China

Chanat from the tomb of Qin Shihuangdl. Bronzs.

Supposedly. from the ~ century B,C. But/he splenOid contemporary harnas8 tM 0'
horses and the bent shaft which one can make only from iron conlradlct9 this AI 9£e
features of the 1r!" centlJIy of our 8(8.

---.."::.:-
•
o I =:::t'
•..1:

-
-" ~ , ,o

The pert 0' 0rIe d _ 7 The from one alb

Dead ... ca.. 'IthIdt opar«liJI '952.
The (Joonmm caves.

Excavations of a Oumran settlament - Khlrbet Oumran.

The Falasha called
lhemsel-.; "The
Home of lS/8e1" (Beta
Israef) or in their
natIVe language of the
eus/llle groop they
have used the self·
designation of "Ksyle",
Generally the Falashs
did not know Hebrew
One may consider m.
"sabbath Instructions"
(Tehszaze $8nbe') as
an origlflsl WOlk of
Fa/asM IJteraturs. Itt
this book, Shabbat Ja
personified· is I'
understood as a
female bekIQ, which
embodie, a tIN...,...
light. In If rtIf# IeQ6rIIdf
that re/6M 10 StNlbbet
are set forth IfI an
engaging form.
Gratings on the wi ws of t
temple of sainI Sophia in Istanbul.
A Star of David protects the Moslem
temple.

"Christ Surrounded by Musician Angels," Hans Memflng.

And I heard 8 voice saYIng
to me: Hear, ngh/aous
John. There will be
questlOfl6d 01 Adam's race
rhose nallOfls, both the
Greek and those who have
beheved in idols. and III
the sun. and in the stars,
and /hose who have defiled
the faith by heresy, and
who have not believed !he
holy resumx:tJOfl. and who
have not confessed the
Father, and the Son, and
the Holy Ghost- (The
ReveJabon of John the
Theologian) Thus the
pecpIe prayed to the SlM1,
the moon and the S1afS. to
the Golden Cow (the caIf_
to /he golden twins). the
serpent. etc,

Altar of the Chrl9bl1f/;:;;;;;~~

--,,~""-'-
GiOno dJ Bandane porrrayed the 12 apostles with halos over their heads

The Last Supper.

An altar frontispiece from the Suriguerola monastery. supPOftKJly the second halt of the
1~ century, in fect the 15 or 1fJ" century.
 ti.
frogmen' 01 Jan MItt ~ picfUre
and combfne it MIittI II ilJIldern
depiction of the temple 01 Sall1t
lmoo. the most 8naenl in
Constanhnop/e. The temple 01
Saint Irene is K1enllfl6d suff/CI6(JtJy
~00dJ'y. By the way: the presence
01 two mmarets speaks to the fact
that van Eye/( was P8JflMg III
Istanbul exactly In the , Sth csntuf)'
- just then ware the two minarets
Installed alongside SalOt Irene.
ArTISts of the 15- 18" cenrunes
doubled not for a minute that Christ
was cmcified on the Bosporus
Golgotha is depicted in the
second picture against the
background 01 a bay.

The T8mpIe of Solomon

(5uleiman·s Mosqus)
The map 01 .Jerusalem was p«;tuffJd as II center 01 the Wori:1.
Gannwer. 1580, The NatJOtla1libfaty oIlsrool.
IMAGINARY MIDDLE AGES~ _
In supposedly 663 A.D., the well·known pillage of Rome by
Emperor Constantine II is described. "Constantine saw the roofs,
shining with the gild of the bronze and sacrilegiously issued a
command to dismantle these roofs and to load the valuable shards
onto boats... Constance was in Rome for twelve days; this time .
was enough for a most complete plunder of the city of all its .
ancient bronze valuables".
BIBLE _
The well·known Biblical "Babylonian Captivity", which
decisively concluded the history of the Judaic kingdom: The exile
from Jerusalem came after the war with Nebuchadnezzar.
IMAGINARY MIDDLE AGE!l:>. _
The well·known "Avignon CaptiVity", which was called a
"Babylonian Exile" in the Middle Ages. It decisively concludes
the history of the Roman Empire of the IO-13th centuries A.D.
BIBLE _
The exile of the God-fearing people lasted 70 years according
to the Bible (II Chronicles 36:20-20. This event is unique in
Biblical history.

The "Avignon Exile" lasts exactly 70 years. This event is

unique in the Western European chronicles and in the history of
the papacy.
In the New Testament, as is known, there is little historical
information, and therefore, we will not find in it evident parallels
with the events and situation of the Middle Ages. It is all the
more curious to compare the text of a Testament and the writings
which accompany it with the works of those authors who lived a
millennium after Jesus Christ, who died on the cross supposedly
in the first. century of the new era. What did the Babylonian
princess and writer, Anna Comnena, who described the life of her
father Alcxius Comnenus in the composition "Alexsiad", know about
him, for example?
The Christian Anna Comnena did not know anything about
Jesus. In any case, she does not once mention him.
24\
 In order to understand how in general the medieval authors
and cartographers represented the world to themselves after Christ,
the researcher John Kirtland Wright analyzed maps of that time.
They speak about the epoch of the creation of the New Testament
often more vividly than many, maJ1Y works.
If one is to judge by the maps, the notions mankind has about
geography before the crusades is monstrous. World maps have a T·
shaped form, the Earth is a flat circle, there naturaJly is no
representation of the Earth's sphericity. Only after centuries did
the church allow by its own decree representations of the Earth's
sphericity to not be considered heretical. The civilized world
still does not know anything about anyone named Ptolemy. The
planets, the sun, the moon and the stars are considered not bodies,
but divine substances, the movement of which is subject to God's
plan. Eclipses are inflicted on the Earth - either on all of it,or on
especially offensive territories. 1f the Lord wants, he can create a
solar eeli pse even in a full moon.
Troy and the seven wonders of the world are indicated on all
maps. Among them is the Lighthouse of Alexandria, which not
only is designated on the maps, but also is used actively in
seafaring. That very lighthouse, which is considered a creation of
distant ancestors. The Colossus of Rhodes, the Roman Capitoline,
the Statue of Bellerophon in Smyrna, the theater in Heracleum, the
baths of Apollo in Tyana and Diana's temple in Ephesus are all
depicted on the maps as contemporary medieval structures. The
towers of BabyIon and Carthage are denoted together. There are
no mentions of the Egyptian pyramids. Only in the later Middle
Ages did they begin to speak about them as about the famous
storehouses of the Biblical Joseph.
The territory of Egypt is called Babylonia, and Cairo is
Babylon. The crusaders, having been sent on the fourth crusade,
ponder their destination - Alexandria or Babylon. Even a
conception of the Mediterranean Sea does not exist yet; such a
name is nowhere to be found, and its dimensions have been
exaggerated, at a minimum, by three times.
Europe's distortions also are monstrous. Okay. at least Europe
itself is on the maps. London, true, is called New Troy. However,

242
there is no place for Russia, for example, on the earth· just after
Armenia on the maps of Beatus of Osma, which go back to 1203,
the ocean begins. By the way, it is known that even in the 18th
century in "Geography" published by Peter the Great, there is no
place found for Russia. There is no such name on the map.
In the center of Europe, on the Danube, live savages - their
homes arc made from reeds, the faces are awful, and on the maps they
are depicted. as Pygmies who fight with cranes (on the Hieronymus
map supposedly of t 150). In Sweden, in Uppsala, in the middle of
the 12th century there stands a pagan temple in which human
sacrifices take place (according to a descri ption of one of the most
competent sJXX:ialists on the European North, Adam Bremsky). The
Vikings, the immediate neighbors of Germany, are involved with
piracy and cannibalism. "And it will not enter the father's head to
spare his son or the brother a brother, but the daughter is satisfied,
gobbling down the cooked flesh of her own mother!"
Jerusalem is the center of the Earth, according to the Bible.
The Temple of Solomon is depicted on all maps of the city where
now the mosque of Gmar rises, a millennium after its "destruction"!
On the plan of Jerusalem from the anonymous composition,
"Deeds of the Francs who Captured Jerusalem" ("Situs Jerusalem")
the temple itself recalls Saint Sophia in form. Five gates are
indicated - Sajnt Stephen's, Jehoshaphat, Unnamed, Zion and David,
and the plan is circular, although Palestinian Jerusalem had the
shape of a rectangle.
Among the churches of Constantinople are named the churches
of Saint Sergius and Saint Bacchus. As we already have noted, the
sot Bacchus was a saint until the Scaligerian creators of history
sent him into the distant past to be a pagan deity.
De Clari, the author of the accounts of the crusades, describes a
luxurious hi ppodrome in Constantinople. A quadriga from this
hi ppodrome stands to this day next to the cathedral of Saint Mark in
Venice. The hippodrome in Constantinople was used for massive
spectacles and executions, although an execution is also a spectacle.
Whether or not it is about this execution, which is well seen from the
territory of the Galatians on the opposite shore of the Golden Horn
Bay, the apostle Paul writes in his well known epistle to the Galatians:

243
 "0 foolish Galatians! Who has bewitched you, before whose
eyes Jesus Christ was publicly portrayed as crucified?"
But these "foolish Galatians", according to the traditional
history, llever lived in Palcstine.
Pontius Pilate used the hi ppodrome in Jerusalem for executions
and spectacles. But just where any such hi ppodrome is on the
maps of Jerusalem, no one knows.
Let us recall how accurately and thoroughly Josephus Flavius
describes the geography of Palestine, and, in particular, the Dead
Sea. One can use this descri ption even for today's tourists who
are making tri ps around Israel. However, what do they record for
us about the Dead Sea in the medieval maps? That the Tigris and
Euphrates flow into it, and that the Dead Sca is larger than the
Indian Ocean. When Flavius called it an asphalt lake he was
much closer to the truth.
But this means that they still had not read Flavius in the
12th century, although the opinion was widespread that all medieval
religious publications contained, besides the Bible, his works as an
ancient author. They had not read Flavius because his writings
did not yet exist. He wrote in the 15th century, when they already
had succeeded in learning the geography of Palestine.
Let us return, however, to Europe. There is no Po river on the
map, but there is the Eridanus (Jordan) river, which is found in
Cisalpine Gaul, descriptions of \\/hich coincide in an astonishing
manner with the Biblical descri ptions of Galilee. And even the
names Gaul - Galilee (Gallia - Galilaia) are very close.
Here it is appropriate to say several words about the authority
of the written sources in the Middle Ages. If some author were
writing about something as about the truth, many began to quote
him without discussion. And if he accidentally wrote in the word
Gallia a superfluous letter, this spelling became legitimate. An
example: the ancient writer Commodion of the 3-4-5th centuries
(an astonishing dispersal in datingsD lived, according to some
sources, in Gaul, and according to others ~ in Galilee.
The notion of the "Byzantine Empire" does not exist in general.
For the whole world it is simply Greece, and the emperors are
called emperors of Constantinople. For the Greeks, this is Romania.

244
The Greeks call their own city only Czarigrad or Byzantium.
Constantinople is the name for it used by foreigners.
Who are such Greeks for the Latins, that is those, who practice
the faith according to Roman law (Catholics)? "The Greeks are traitors
and murders; loyalty is alien to them, and they are worse than Jews.
The Greeks are the enemies of the Lord" (Robert de Clari. The Chronicle
"The Conquest of Constantinople"). Here it is - the religious
justification of the crusade of the Latin crusaders to Const.:lJ1tinople.
But you see, an attack on the city is considered a deadly sin.
Supposedly according to a decree of the COtulcil of Narbonne in the
year of the great schism of 1054, it was decided to consider an attack
on Constantinople as the shedding of the blood of Christ himself.
Pay attention: it is not Jerusalem, but Constantinople!
Constantinople is in general Christ's city. Here is a mass of
holy relics, the medieval authors think. Among them arc the
vivifying cross, the ti p of the spear that pierced Christ, the blood
of the Son of God, the nails, the shroud with the image of Christ's
face (burnt), the marble pillar to which Jesus was tied before
punishment, the crown of thorns, the head of "our monsignor John
the Baptist". So wrote de Clari, who thought, as a true Frank, of
John as his own saint, and not as an alien.

Veil6lian doge Dandalo and saint Marl< with book.

De Clari has one more riddle. He for some reason calls Saint
Sophia temple the "Sainte Souphie monastery (note, not Sophie)".
And he adds that, in French, it is Saint Trinity. He is of the
opinion that the Greeks have no notion of Salnt Trinity.

245
 If one is to consider that in Revelation astrological motifs are
used (and such a point of view is shared today by many traditional
historians), then it is possible to date this to the Middle Ages with
an even greater degree of probability. You see, Anna Comnena
authoritatively reports that astrological research began only in
the 12th century (at least, in Greece). She refers to a certain
Alexandrian who worked in the Byzantine court who was banished
to the island of Rodosto in the Sea of Marmora. There he continued
his astrological and astronomical investigations according to a
commission of the emperor, Alexius Comnenus.
A curious trait for the epoch's characteristics.
The well-known traveler Benjamin of Tudela, haVing visited
Asia, reports about "the Prince of the Babylonian Exile", a descendant
of the Israelite King David. His authority had spread to all the
Jews of the Orient - Shinar, Persia, Khorasan, Sheba, Diyar Kalach,
Aram Naharaim, the mountains of Ararat, to the country of the
Alans, and also to the land of Siberia (just so).
This means the Babylonian Exile still existed, and in particular
under this name. One needs to suppose that Benjamin of Tudela,
himself a Jew, was acquainted with the Torah and the time when
the "real" Babylonian Exile took place.
That the Middle Ages earlier was a time of evangelical explosion
is a widely known fact. Many "ancient" relics were registered in
the Roman churches in the inventory lists, including too the famous
manger of Bethlehem at the Roman basilica of Santa Maria Maggiore.
Not in Bethlehem, but in Italy! Just what do they show the pilgrims
and tourists in Bethlehem today? God only knows.
The main European center of the cult of the Virgin Mary was
located, and is located to this day, in Loreto (Italy), which is in
the territory of Cisalpine Gaul (that is, Galilee'> According to the
church version, Mary's house was carried by angels through the air
from Nazareth in 1295! One had to get the angels to explain just
how the Virgin Mary's house ended up in ltaly in the Middle
Ages. By the way, the Roman popes regularly congratulated the
Italians on each anniversary of this miracle.
There has remained from the Virgin Mary in Israel, very likely.
only the spring outside of Jerusalem from which, according to

246
tradition, the Blessed Virgin drank. But now a board is fastened
over it with the matter-of-fact inscri ption: "The water is
undrinkable".
Thus, ooe needs to recognize that there are no real historic
events in the pages of the Bible. There are not even any signs of
antiquity. Only imaginary reflections of medieval reality!
Which, as we have already said, were being continually edited.
The first complete printed Bible in English appeared in 1537.
They published it for the first time in 1580-81 in the Orthodox
eastern world - the so-called Ostrozhsky Bible. (Anton Kartashev
"Outlines of Russian Church History" Volume 1). Only in 1821
was the "Bible of Greek Text" printed for the first time (ibid).
However, the appearance of printed editions of the Book of
Books did not mean that its editing was over. This continued
even in the 19th centUl'Y! True, this was with one difference: earlier
they brought the New Testament into line with the Old; now they
adapted the Old to antiquity. The point is that the former editors
displayed excessive eagerness and filled the Old Testament with
Christian words and notions. That is with those which, according
to legend, were able to appear only centuries after the Judaic canon.
It was necessary to remove them. Otherwise, the Old Testament
looked like a contemporary of the New, which it was in any event.
Here are the facts.
In a comparison of the Ostrozhsky Bible with a contemporary
synodal translation of the Old Testament, it is clear that such
especially Christian notions were used as altar, icon case, icons
and iconostas. In the Ostrozhsky, the Temple of Solomon itself is
called a church!
The translation had to be re-done:
"And he built on the rear side of the temple... a wall, and he
covered the walls and the ceilings with cedar boards, and he built
an inner sanctuary for the Holy of Holies... In the inner sanctuary
itself, within the temple, he prepared to sct there the ark of the
covenant of the Lord (in the Ostrozhsky there is an icon case for
keeping the especially revered icons)" (J Kings 6:16-20, 6:23).
There are no longer an altar and icons. And Solomon's temple
is no longer a church. Everything looks solid and respectable,

247
congruent with the legend.
It must be emphasized that the editors of various branches of
Christianity also edited the books of the Bible differently, and
they included or did not include these in their canons. For example,
the Maccabean books of the Old Testament were not included in
the Judaic and Orthodox canons, but are recognized by the Western
church. So, there are lines about the victories of the Romans in
Spain (I Maccabees, 8:3), which appeared on the map of Europe
only in the second half of the 16th century.
In the same period as the book of Maccabees, there is Demetrius,
who opposes luda; a defense alliance of the Jews with the Romans
is described precisely the same as the annalistic alliance of the
Russian princes with Czarigradl (ibid., 21-30).
Changes in the religious books are on-going even in our days.
True, they do not concern the canons, but only because in conlrast
to the Middle Ages, when the canons just were being created and
affirmed, it would be an upheaval of the fundamentals of the faith.
There are two more important questions connected with the
Bible.
The compilation of the Old Testament in its full scope (in
particular in the Middle Ages) was, in our view, an appropriate
event. The conditions which were inimical to the Jews demanded
it. It was found expedient to rally those who remained faithful to
the old monotheism. It was necessary again to demonstrate the
inviolability of the union with the Most High. To prescribe all the
rules of behavior in detail. To remember the prohibitions and
commandments, the observance of which only was able to save the
monotheists from the deadly sin of falling away from the faith of
the fathers.
The enemies of Judaism note, as they express themselves. the
"cruel and merciless nature of the Judaic God". He assails the
"chosen people" with all sorts of penalties. He is ready continually
to erase them from the face of the Earth, as he erased Sodom and
Gomorrah. Moses restrains Him with difficulty from the most
severe of measures.
One can consider such a relationshi p to the "chosen" as logical
and righteous only if the goal of the Scri pture is to strengthen the

248
spirit of the vacillators and to show graphically what can happen
with those who change the tradition. And therefore, a just and
good Lord, who ha<; created this bC<lutifu I world, grows embittered
and is constantly indignant, remaining at arm's length from
restoring his erstwhile union with the Jews.
But just how was the Old TesUlment able to appear in the
contemporary Christian canon? And why in the New Testament
are there so many references to the Old if the Christians were
struggling with Judaism? At that, every reference is evidence of
the fact that Christians considered the Old Testament an ancient
holy book.
The new religion needed ancient roots. No one would have
perceived a just-born Jesus Christianity as an entirely new
doctrine. People do not change their beliefs like their clothes.
Every time religious trends are born, decades are needed, and even
centuries to involve a sufficient number of followers in the sphere
of its influence. But this happens much more quickly if the new
doctrine is tightly connected with an old, habitual one. At the
initial stage it was necessary to convince the newly converted of
its antiquity and continuity. Therefore, the Old Testament also
was included in the modern Bible; hence also numerous references
in the New Testament to the Old Testament "prophecies" of the
coming of Jesus Christ.
For the sake of objectivity it is necessary to say that Christians
were not only convinced of, but even introduced their own dogma.
And not by swords alone. Christianity has used bribery. As an
inducement to conversion Lo the new religion by former Jews,
they bestowed full rights, permitting them to live where they
wanted and to work in any branch of the economy and culture.
However, this happened only when the doctrine of Jesus Christ
had won a complete victory.
This happened only at the end of the 16th century. In
particular, when the contemporary canon of the Bible was canonized
during the COllnci! of Trent by the Roman-Catholic Church. In
the West, the chronological schema of Joseph Scaliger (himself a
former Jew) had already appeared, according to which there had
existed a break in time of centuries between Judaic Biblical
tradition and Christianity. In that way it was sought to minimize
249
the mutual anti pathy of Judaism for Christianity, and vice versa.
The Judaic canon became integral part of the Christian Bible.
The role of the Council of Trent in general was a huge onc.
This is confirmed by a number of facts which also are recognized
by traditional history. Before it, no complete Christian Bibles had
been published, not only in Latin, but also in the Greek and Church-
Slavonic languages. Those several manuscri pts that are dated with
a time before the Council were found only in the 19-20th centuries
and have already been tied to the Scaliger chronology, precluding,
in our view, the accuracy of their dating.
The Bible was, is and always will be a sacred book. But it is
not, and cannot be, a source of reliable historic information.

250
THAT TO WHICH
OUR ANCESTORS PRAYED CHAPTER THIRTEEN

The followers of every religion that exists in the world are

convinced not only of the truth of their faith, but also of the fact
that this faith is unique. We won't argue with their views. We
act with respect toward all faiths which are based on the love of
fellow-man and kindness, on princi pies which help living in the
world and harmony with those around us. But one WOll ld wish
to make several observations here as regards originality.
They all boil down to the fact that there are no religions, and
never have been any, which arc not similar to each other. And the
Judaic monotheism of the Middle Ages, about which we have been
speaking in our book, appeared neither suddenly nor in a vacuum.
By the highest standards, it was the result of the successive
development of many predecessor faiths. That is, it was not an
anomaly in the history of mankind. There is nothing accidental in
the spiritual development of people.
Let us investigate then, what it was to which our ancestors
prayed before the appearance of contemporary monotheism. What
kind of precursors of this were there? It is possible to arrive at
some idea of this by analyzing today's religious rites and rituals.
They are extraordinarily expressive and have preserved pre-
monotheistic features so clearly that specialists unhesitatingly
define their ancient pagan origin. The whole question consists of
how ancient they are. Here we have princi pal disagreements with
the specialist adherents of traditional history.
Let us examine even such a well known feature of Judaism as
circumcision. The deepest religious and mystical significance is
imparted to this. It is a sign of the union of the chosen people
with the Most High. The Jews think that Adam was created as a
perfect human and was circumcised. But after the expulsion from
paradise, the foreskin appeared in his descendants as a sign of the
imperfection of human nature. And only a long time later did

25t
God order Abraham, regarded by all Jews as their forefather, to
perform circumcision on himself and all the men of his home.
The Most High commanded: "This is My covenant which you
shall keep between Me and you and you and your descendants after
you: Every male among you shall be circumcised" (Genesis, 17:10).
Abraham completed the rite himself and compelled all the
male members of his clan to complete it, including the oldest son,
Ishmael, from whom, in accordance with the Koran, the Moslems
carry out their tradition of circumcision. But Abraham already
had circumcised the younger son, Itzhak, according to the covenant,
on the eighth day after birth.
Since then, in strict accordance with the covenants, the Jews
circumcise all the infants of the male sex on the eighth day of life.
In the symbolism of the Torah the number eight designates the
spiritual world which is superior to the earthly world. A boy
who is circumcised on the eighth day gains control over natural
instincts with the help of the spiritual beginning. Moreover, as it
says in the Talmud: "At the second of circumcision, the Angel of
Jehovah comes to the circumcised infant and will stay with him
until death itself'.
The Moslems, who also consider Abraham as their forefather,
have no firm rules for removal of the foreskin. With them,
circumcision is not dogma, but only a traditional custom (the
SOllnat.) Therefore, the Turks complete the rite on children 8 - 13
years old, the Persians on 3 - 4-year-olds, the Malaysians on 10-18-
year-aIds, urban Arabs in the 5-6th year, and rural in the 12-14th
year. What is circumcised from the Moslems is buried in the
earth as a symbol of the fact that we originated from the earth and
we return there.
Sa it is with the adherents to Islam today. There are serious
grounds to think that there were times when burial of the
circumcised foreskin had a completely different meaning. But
more will be said about that.
According to the Jews, God chose them out from the overall
mass of people, and marked them with this, His own special, Divine
sign. Thereby He showed to the rest of mankind that they were
endowed with special functions and a special mission in life.
They are the bearers of God's word, of the revelations and covenants
of the Most High. At the same time, the Jews think that the quality

252
of being chosen is connected with a whole series of limitations,
prohibitions, and the most severe rules of behavior which touch on
all aspects of life. These rules are united by the notion of "kashrut".
Not for nothing is the proverb popular among pious Jews: "It is
hard to be a Jew". Really, it is not easy to observe all the rules.
However, the mission to be a Jew is still honorable! A Hon-
Jew would have to endeavor very, very hard to get into the ranks
of the chosen. There is oat supposed to be a mass conversion to
Judaism. Jews at all times have been left in an insignificant, at
times, almost disappearing minority, but even so it is expected
that the chosen people should live. Otherwise, the notion itself of
the quality of being chosen loses its purpose.
Thus, a strongly pronounced closed, caste mentality is peculiar
to Judaism. This is its ancestral feature, just as integral and
ineradicable as the genetic peculiarity of each of us.
The Moslems, on the other hand, are convinced that they have
been recognized not only to carry God's revelation to all ends of
tbe planet, but also to multi ply the ranks of the circumcised. The
process ends only when not one man is left on earth with a foreskin.
Christianity, as is known, does not recognize circumcision.
However, the fact that according to the New Testament, Jesus Christ
was circumcised, demanded explanations of the church fathers. A5
a result, the following rationalization arose: The Lord, Creator of
the law, had accepted circumcision, being an example of how people
are supposed to fulfill meticulously divine institutions. The Lord
accepted circumcision so that no one afterwards could doubt that
He was a true Man, and not a wearer of spectral flesh as some
heretics (Docetes) taught. In the New Testament, the rite of
circumcision gave way to the sacrament of Baptism, which it typified
(Colossians 2:11-12).
Together with circumcision, which was accepted by the Lord
as a sign of God's covenant with the people, He received also the
name of Jesus (Savior) as a seal of His devotion to the cause of
saving the world (Matthew 1:21; Matthew 16:7; Mark 9:38·39;
Luke 10:17; Acts 3:6; Acts 3:16; Philippians 2:9-10). These two
events, which were performed at the very start of the earthly life of
the Savior, remind Christians that they entered into the New
Testament with God and "were circumcised with a circumcision
made without hands, by putting off the body of flesh in the

253
circumcISion of Christ"(Colossians 2: t I).
This is the opinion of the believers.
And there is an everyday point of view. In contemporary
society the belief is widespread that circumcision serves as a means
of male hygiene. Moslems, in particular, are convinced that this
procedure improves health and beneficially influences the
intellectual capabilities of men.
A purely sexual explanation also exists. For men who have
undergone circumcision, indefatigability in love and the ability to
give women the greatest pleasure is imputed.
Such an opinion has spread not only among Jews and Moslems.
Whatever they have said about the uniqueness of circumcision, we
encounter this ritual in all parts of the world ~ in Australia,
Polynesia, Africa, America and the Malay Archi pel.ago. One can
say without exaggeration that it is panhuman.
They carry through the most diverse operations with the
phallus. They cut it from below along the whole length, pierce
through from top to bottom or from one side to the other, put rings
on it, and keep it in special sheaths ... Never have so many
contrivances which border on sadism been connected with any
human body part as with this one.
The reason underlying both circumcision and similar
mani pulations is found in the fact that, in a definite period of
human history, the cult of the phallus flourished everywhere. The
ancestors venerated the male genitaJ organ in particular. Echoes
of that distant pagan period live to this day.
We shall explain briefly why such a cult existed and why it
gave birth to the rite of circumcision.
At the foundation of all agrarian religious ideas of antiquity, and
in some places even in our time,lies the worship of fertility. It finds
its reflection in many both vanished and surviving rites and rituals.
Their beliefs inevitably changed with the transition of our
ancestors from hunting to organized animal husbandry and
farming. Before, everything depended on the hunter's success, and
the gods, to whom they prayed and brought sacrifices, granted
them this in particular. These were forest spirits, unseen masters
of everything living, of the plains and the mountains, the gods of
fire and the hunt. Usually they brought them parts or whole animals
as a sacrifice, although, if they were not successful for a long time,

254
they then resorted also to human sacrifice. They often selected a
victim from among themselves in order to simultaneously decrease
the number of hungry in the family or clan.
The dependence of man on luck was reduced abruptly with the
transition to settled animal husbandry and farming. People ceased
being dependent on "the gods of the animals" and therefore, ceased
bringing them tribute. Instead of the old gods, new ones appeared,
on whom depended the harvest and the offspring of the cattle. The
cults of the sun, rain and fertility moved into first place in all faiths.
It is well known that in practically all agrarian cultures of
Europe and Asia, the main god was the Sun, and bad weather was
considered a manifestation of the rage of the gods.
But this is only one part of the mythology. There also is another,
which included the gods of fertility. In comparison with the first,
this has been studied poorly, and the Puritanism peculiar to Eurasian
civilization of the 18-20th centuries has been the reason. We have
been brought up in such a way that it even provokes uneasiness for
us sometimes to discuss the sexually religious notions of our ancestors.
lndccd, how is one to speak about the veneration of sex organs?
And after all, in particular, the ancestors saw in them both the
means and the symbol of fertility. Whether we want to or not, we
must recognize that this cult in particular exerted tremendous
influence on the development of modern civilization. But mankind
prefers to remember this as rarely as possible.
Our ancestors did not consider sex as a "sordid" business.
The other way round, they considered it a pure pursuit and pleasing
to the gods. They organized games, processions and festivals in
honor of it. On holidays, in contrast to us, they did not carry
flags and banners, but something completely different.
- In "ancient" Greece during the holiday of Bacchus, the
"Canephor" virgins carried a representation of a phallus, which
was decorated with flowers.
- Saint Foutin, a follower of Priapus, enjoyed great respect in
Provance, Languedoc, and Lyons. The power to endow fertility
was ascribed to Saint Foutin. According to the ritual, they carried
images of weakened or ill sexual members to him. A statue of him
had the appearance of a huge phallic branch.
- Saint Augustine witnessed how in Carthage during a holiday
procession they carried in an amazingly beautiful chariot a model

255
of a phallus which the women decorated with garlands of flowers.
- The "tau" was a symbol of Osiris, and the "van" of Isis - as the
Egyptians called the male and female sex organs.
- Yarilo is an Eastern European deity, connected with a pagan
Sun cult. A straw man of Yarilo with an enormous protruding
phallus was made during ceremonies.
Incidentally, in modcrn Russia, and even in other countries,
where people profess Orthodoxy, a rich Easter bread cake is baked
during Easter of an elongated cylindrical shape which stands erect.
A glaze the color of a man's sperm is poured over it and it is
surrounded with cooked chicken eggs which are decorated, as a
rulc. in dark brown toncs. All this is considered a truly Christian
Orthodox custom, and a priest blesses the Easter cake after public
worshi p in honor of Easter.
- The Vikings conSidered the pole as a phallic symbol, which
fertilized Mother Earth. The descendants of the Vikings sing and
dance in a ring and drink beer around this pole to this day.
- The peoples of the Far North have huge walrus penises standing
erect over the tombs of shamans, and onc can always determinc from
them whether a gravc is that of a sorcercr or of an ordinary individual.
- The Koreans called the phalliC spirit Pooghyn, and in
sanctuaries devoted to him, they have hung a phallus made of
wood on the wal1. Despite official prohibition, the cult persisted
into the beginning of the 20th century.
- Tn Japan in a number of places to this day, especially in a
Village, feslivals are held in honor of the phallus. They carry images
and models of the sex organ along the streets of the settlements on
special litters; women do honor to them, trying to touch them
lightly as sources which help in the birth of progeny.
It is important to emphasize that these holidays are not of a
frivolous or vulgar nature. They are not to stir up the crowd's base
instincts, inflame lust, or provoke sexual orgies. They arc much
more serious and significant.
Without fertility. people have no offspring, no harvest in the
fields or increase of cattle. There is no life. Therefore, they also
worship the phallus. Thus the plow, which loosens Mother Earth,
also embodies for them the impregnating penis. And the Sun
fertilized the earth with its radiance. It sent hot rays and the
plants absorbed them and bloomed in order afterwards to bear

256
 fruit. So the ancestors thought.
Traces of the cult of the fertilizing sun have remained in the
languages of peoples. The word "Zion" is connected not only
with "to shine", but also with "son", paralleling the astonishing
similarity of the words "sun" and "son" in the English language.
There are serious grounds to think that the word "Christ" had the
same meaning as "Zion", only in another language, and "Jesus Christ"
is something like "messenger of the world".
The phallus did not only carry out its primary tasks in the
notions of the ancestors. The Arabic traveler, Ibn Fadlan, for example,
reported on it. He noted that many Bashkir men wore wooelen
amulets around the neck in the form of a phallus as a sign of
manhood. They put similar, but smaller amulets on the children as
a means of protection from evil around them.
Worshi p of the phallus also was expressed in the wearing of
covers which protected it. This custom is noted in dozens of
places, but most of all in the Mediterranean· Egypt, Greece, and
Asia Minor. Thus, for example, a penis sheath figures among the
emblems of the Egyptian pharaohs.
The phallus occupied a special place in sacrifice. The male
sexual implements were valued significantly higher as an offering
to the gods than any others.
It is clear that they did not cut off their own penises at the
beginning. Enemies were doomed to this fate. Even now in
Africa there are tribes where such a custom flourishes. So that
they recognize a lad as a warrior and a marriageable young man, he
is supposed to bring to his chosen one an enemy's severed penis,
which the marriageable girl cooks and eats. She in the literal sense
imbibes the "fertility" of this part of the body.
In the official history of "ancient" Egypt we read:
"I.n the enumeration of trophies obtajned by Egyptian soldiers
in Libya in the 13th century B.C., 13,320 penises are mentioned".
They were buried in the floor. Thus fertility was boosted.
Simultaneously, as the researchers note, especially practical problems
also were resolved. This procedure became a substitute for murder of
military prisoners during slavery and other forms of bondage.
Emasculation has been brought to us in a multitude of histories
and legends. It is characteristic for the cults of Isis and Osiris,
Adonis, Tammuz and Dionysius. The cult of the mother goddess

257
Cybele and Attis is based 011 it. The traditional scholarshi prelates
it to the 8th century B.C. and describes the homeland of this cult
as the semi·mythical country of Phrygia in Asia Minor.
In this cult, the god Attis, Cybelc's lover, a god who died and
was resurrected, according to the myth, was forced to emasculate
himself, becoming a prototype for the priests of the goddess Cybele,
who were eunuchs. Cybele. being the reason of the castration and
the death of Attis, raises him from the dead herself. The priests of
this cult, after self-emasculation, threw their phalli into the face of
the crucl goddess. It is reported that many citizens followed the
example of the priests.
It occurs to us that this fact is evidence again about one aspect of
castration as a socially religious phenomenon. At a definite stage.
emasculation became a method of keeping people from everything
that was considered vile, sordid, and repulsive from the perspective of
elevated concepts of the heavens and spirituality. With this idea at
their root. cults came into being in which the notion "purification"
was paramount. We will discuss this in greater detail further.
Right now we shall note that over time the eunuch came to be
recognized as the most suitable figure to be an executive of state
affairs at all levels, even at the very highest. Having undergone
"purification," nothing distracted him from business. It was
impossible to entice him with sexual pleasures. Be was not worried
aboul posterity, about the accumulation of riches for his children
and grandchildren, inasmuch as he could have none. Physically
and mentally traumatized, the eunuch found meaningful purpose in
life only in work for the welfare of those he served. And the higher
up the ladder of power he climbed, the marc grimly he identified
with the people whose fortunes he managed. He, as it were, took
revenge on the mass of normal, common people for his own mutilation.
And this only promoted the consolidation of power and
accumulation of riches of his ma<;ters. The eunuch was considered a
very valuable functionary.
The eminence of the eunuchs occurred when the institution of
fatherhood was firmly established. There is nothing at variance
with this.
It is no secret to anyone that in societies which are based on
hunting and fishing, the notion of individual paternity was
practically unknown. The same as with monkeys - the highest

258
primates: the producers of descendants were the collective tribal
colony. The modern question "who's child is this" didn't concern
anyone; fathers partici pated in bringing up children only
indirectly and collectively.
Vestiges of such a relationshi p to marriage are met to this day
in the peoples of the Far North and in African tribes. There, sex
with one of the women, even married, can be offered to a guest as a
sign of respect, as too the other attributes of hospitality.
Only in the transition to farming, whose fruits allow a family
to live apart from the clan, docs the question of familial property
and paternity acquire topicality. The accumulation of knowledge
about the family and fertility on the one hand, and the break-up of
the tribal order on the other, enables this to a great extent.
As soon as the self-perception of "my child, my family" appeared
in men, the institution of inheritance was conceived and, as a
consequence of it, the clear-cut definition of who is a father and
who is an uncle. At the same time, in the notion of the ancestors, the
woman is turned into a baby-making machine, having no right'i to
her children. She becomes like the earth, which yields the harvest.
The earth does not have any right to the harvest, correct? The farmer
who plowed the field and threw the seed onto it takes it.
Many peoples and nationalities of Asia and Africa have
maintained such a relationshi p to women even up to the present
time. It has become stronger in a somewhat changed form in Islam.
As a result, besides the eunuchs, there arises their opposite in
society· the polygamists. It is necessary for someone to create
descendants! Among the super fathers mainly are the heads of
clans, the landed feudal lords. They can allow themselves to keep
a harem, a multitude of children and harem guards - the eunuchs.
At the same time, a symbiosis of the opposite poles of sexuality - the
sexless eunuchs and the polygamists - is taking shape. People who
live under the same roof, as a rule, become familiars, and in particular
this well-known psychological phenomenon, in this instance, the
intimacy of the overlord and the eunuch, enable the colossal influence
of the emasculated on the government of state affairs.
Professor Shih-Shan Henry Tsai (Fulbright College, USA) in
the article, "Impotent Power: Eunuchs in China" (2002) shows that
practically all supreme authority in ancient China was concentrated
in the hands of the eunuchs. Heirs to the throne grew up in the

259
company of eunuch youths who also became their best friends and
advisors. Those castrated received the highest posts in the taxation
institutions, the court. But mainly - in religious structures.
This took place not only in China. There are references in the
Byzantine chronicles that some posts in the religious and state
hierarchy were given only to the castrated.
Their influence was huge. They advanced a multitude of ideas
which were assimilated later on by a majority of religions: self-
denial, self-torture, prophecy, chastity and the cult of virginity.
They introduced to medieval society asceticism and martyrdom,
created other sects or castes of "the holy" which were closed for
all others, that is of "pure" people.
In particular then sex for the first time is declared "a sordid
business". The Latin word casta, or katar in Greek, means "pure."
Let us recall the well-known notion "catharsis", which has stayed
since that time in all European languages and which means "spiritual
purification". Caste originally meant a closed sect of those purified
of sexual sin. An emasculated man who is in power inevitably
advocated the denial of the sexual, which is expressed through the
notion of "sordid" in intimate relations.
The mechanism of this process is shown graphically in the
literary subjects of the Middle Ages. One of them is set forth in
the novel, "Historia C'alamitatum" of Pierre Abelard (traditionally
1079-1142, most likely, significantly later.) The classical French
theologian, to whom they ascribe the concept of the Holy Trinity,
describes his own emasculation. It is said that the uncle of Pierre's
lover hired robbers for the completion of this operation. The uncle
took revenge for the desecrated honor of a niece.
The author says that he lost masculine value and had to go
into a monastery. The phrase itself, "masculine value", which means
phallus, the deprivation of which debars a man from normal life,
reports well to us the atmosphere of those years. Eunuchs arc not
men, they do not have "value", and they do not belong to society
any longer. They have one road - to serve God, to think about the
spiritual. Only there can they be useful to people. True, the monks,
judging by the novel, were not distinguished either by piety or by
strict behavior. But these are just details already, reliably concealed
by monastery walls.
The conclusion offers itself that the monastery, a place where

260
people of the same sex live together, was conceived originally as a
community of eunuchs. Not only the literary subjects are evidence
of this, but also all the outward monastic trappings which
traditionally arc considered Christian. The shapeless garment with
a hood tied with rope, the humble stare of the ascetic at the ground
and many other things - all this has come from the society of the
castrated and had no relationshi p to learning about Jesus Christ.
Castration, especially in Europe. where it was widespread to
the greatest degrcc. played another rolc. too.
Here is what Patrick Barbier writes in the book, "The World
of Castrati".
'·... the whole of medieval Europe was concerned to a greater or
lesser degree with the phenomenon of castration. It was still used
in various places to torture prisoners and also to punish men who
had committed crimes and rape Isic]. The medical profeSSion, too,
did not hesitate to use it, mistakenly as a rule, to cure or prevent
certain illnesses such as leprosy, madness, epilepsy, hydrocele, gout
and various inflammatory conditions. For a long time also it was
claimed as a cure for hernia. This was one of the many pretexts put
forward by Italian families in order to justify the operation during
the golden age of castrato singers. In France castration remained
very common, although it was not used for the same musical purpose.
Statistics drawn up in 1676 by the Societe Royale de Medecine
mentioned more than five hundred cases of boys castratcd because
of hernia in the single diocese of Saint Papoul ncar Carcassonne.
[Like circumcision for "redundant prepuce and phimosis"!]
This phenomenon was practiced especially often in the south
of Europe, where they castrated children with beautiful voices for
singing needs all the way until the 18th century.
Castration took on a popular character in a definite period of
Mediterranean history, and castration of prisoners of war became
in general a common affair.
In "Historical Atlas of the Crusaders" by Angus Konstam
there happens to be a portrayal of an obscure scene taken from a
mediaeval French manuscri pt. The author cites the picture of the
slaughter aFter the capture of Antioch by the crusaders. In the
drawing it is seen perfectly that the hangman is castrating
suspended, already lifeless bodies, and an uncastrated corpse awaits
its turn on the floor. Does this scene have a relationshi p to

261
Christianity as we know it? Of course not.
A second interesting detail in thjs drawing: All of the living
are beardless, and all of the dead -are bearded. Traditional history
ascribed the origin of the habit of shaving to the "ancient" Romans.
One can take to court and accuse of sadism those who wrote this.
Shaving with a bronze, rapidly dulling razor can be only one of the
types of torture, especially under field conditions. If one is to
assume that the castrati themselves, '00 whom hairs simply do not
grow on the face, are involved in the castration (in the drawing),
then the picture takes on a completely different meaning: the priests
of the cult, the castrati, are cutting off the phalli for religious reasons,
most likely, as already has been said, for burying in the ground.
We note that the outer trappings in the picture are purely mediaeval.
So just when was the cult of the phallus?
According to historical measurements, it did not last long -
until it satisfied society with the castrated. Simultaneously, the
circle of eunuchs gathered strength and power.
A complex situation had taken shape. The castrati arc the
highest stratum in the hierarchy of bureaucrats - practically kept
aloof of the immediate government of state affairs, while bringing
to a logical limit the notions "pure" and "sordid". But society was
not able to live without government, and therefore, their helpers
took complete authority into their own hands. At the same time,
they were not castrated. That is, they did not have the sign of
belonging to the supreme Jeadershi p.
Here then, in our opinion, the special distinction - circumcision,
appeared in them. They performed a symbolic castration. Being
deprived of the foreskin, they supposedly gave God a sign that,
finally, they are being castrated in reality. They were concluding
a deal with the heavens! Sigmund Freud held that very same
opinion. He wrote: "Circumcision is a symbolical substitute of
castration ... " (Sigmund Freud, "Moses and Monotheism").
Circumcision, thus, became an agreement with God, a "union of
the word." And only the chosen concluded it. In Egypt circumcision
was used for ritual purposes only by the pharaohs and priests. For
all other categories of the population, it was most strictly forbidden.
The fact is extremely important and significant, identical to non-
acceptance by the Jews of mass circumcision. It also speaks directly
in the Old Testament about union with God through circumcision.
However, no one hurried to be emasculated, that is to carry

262
out the agreement. In distinction from castrati, circumcised officials
were interested vitally that the privileges and predominant places
in society won by them passed by inheritance to their descendants.
They were normal people and wished their children and
grandchildren a well-to-do life. Thus everything gradually fit
into place. The castrati inevitably were supposed to leave the arena
of history. And also inevitably the time arrived when the
descendants of those who were circumcised first took their places.
It has remained and has been used as evidence of ancient
membershi p in the chosen ones.
The procedure of circumcision itself was repeated precisely
and it repeats the procedure of castration in Jews. Let us explain
what is going on. Circumcision is safe at any age, but castration is
not. From the point of view of modern medicine, castration of an
eight-day-old child is the safest. In the first weeks after birth, his
organism is developing actively a large quantity of antibodies and
antibiotics, which help to he,ll the consequences of the birth crisis.
Castration in this period sharply lowers the risk of serious
consequences and especially of a lethal outcome.
This is why the Jews circumcise children in particular on the
eighth day. We see a clear sign in it of a bloody tradition which
has gone out of existence.
But let us return to the spiritual legacy of the castrati. Under
their influence, under the effects of the ideas of "pure" and "sordid"
thc belief arose that for the perception of the loftiest ideas, it is
necessary "to tame the flesh". But not any longer with the aid of a
knife or scissors, but with other more merciful methods.
This idea has received the widest distribution in all the countries
of the world. The history of religions has preserved thousands of
cases when people starved themselves until hallucinations appeared
and they began to "communicate" with heaven. Others sat for
weeks on poles, remaining aloof of everything earthly. The third
ordered locking themselves in caves, in tombs, and in graves in
order to touch lightly in life the world beyond. Hundreds went
into the deserts, to the mountains, to uninhabited islands-anywhere,
if only to be further from this "sordid" world in which there are
womcn. The most zealous charmers of the flesh, for example, priests
of the Algonquin Indians, continued to subject themselves to
castration and refused to accept food prepared by women. But
now these were only individual recurrences of the past.

263
 In India, the priests of Shiva were not castrati, in comparison
with priests of Vishnu, but were obligated to observe chastity.
They stood completely naked during religious ceremonies, while
women lowered themselves to their knees in front of them and
took their sex organs in the hands. And if the men displayed
even the slightest arousal, the believers showered them with stones.
Do not sin even in thoughts!
The ascetics were fanned under the undoubted influence of the
spiritual legacy of the castrati, purely pagan beliefs ~ the so-called
Gnostic cults. The most widespread of them is known under the
names of the Cathar faith, the Bogomils and the Manichees.
And what is more, their appearance was appropriate: they
were connected with the development of cities and craftsmanshi p,
the next stage in the life of society. New methods of obtaining
one's daily bread, independent of the sun and fertility, had an
orientation which was not connected with the phallus and
castration. Therefore, other beliefs also were born.
What lay at the heart of the prosperity of the craftsmen? The
knowledge of a trade. A man's whole life depended on several
production techniques which passed exclusively through inheritance
and was hidden carefully from competitors. There still was no
universal education, neither printing nor professional courses.
Therefore, secret knowledge became the chief thing of value in life.
H a warrior prays to the gods of war in order to win, and a farmer
worshi ps a phallus and the sun in order to receive a harvest and
offspring, then a craftsman worshi ps superior knowledge in order
to receive a new secret through a divine revelation.
Professional castes of craftsmen and closed shop guilds are
born. A cult of Supreme Wisdom appears in conditions of
competition and deep secrecy. Gnosticism means "Knowledge".
Of course, the craftsmen were not able to turn away fully from
the religion of the ancestors. As we already have noted in the
chapter, "History on the Pages of the Bible", people do not change
their beliefs quickly and easily. The downfall of old gods often is
perceived as more painful by far than even poverty and lawlessness.
Therefore, the trappings of asceticism entered the new cults of
divine revelation. At the same time, the division of the world into
"pure" and "sordid" became a foundation for the backbone notions
of Good and Evil.

264
 The cult of the Thrice Great Hermes - the Egyptian Hermes
Trismegistus - is the most urban and strikingly perceptive. The
Eremetists worshi pped the Divine Revelation, of Supreme Wisdom,
in which connection it was expressed through the cult of the
"philosopher's stone" in a material relationshi p.
Contemporary history calls this an absolutely full-fledged pagan
religion with medieval superstitions which supposedly arose in
parallel with Christianity. It is not in the least so.
The well known and described veneration of the secret
revelations of the Kabala, the tradition of the "worshi p of the
Book" of contemporary Jews is a direct consequence of the
appearance of the urban craftsmen's castes and Gnosticism.
Below is presented a table which characterizes the beliefs
which united by the notion of the keen struggle of Good and
Evil. In modern science they are called dualistic.

Religion Zoroastrism Manlchaelsm Cathars= Montanists Hermitism

Bogomils (~,
name
_I""
From 1000 F~m 1000-1200
""""
1QO-2OOA.D. 1QO-2ooA.D.
Traditional
to 1700 B.C. 1QO-2ooA.D. A.D. Until 1200-
dating 14ooA.D.
until the
present
,

Geography All Southern From Italy Practically all Phrygia Egypt and
and To China of Europe (Asia Minor) The
From the
Central Asia
Balkans to """"""'"
France

'Traditional Pagan Catholic Qualified as Qualified as Pagan

dualism. sources have Christian Christian Gnosticism.
qualiftcalio heresy. heresy. Strict Many motifs of
, Strict attempted
, asceticism qualification Dualism. asceticism. ancient
as a Christian Strict Egyptian
heresy. asceticism. mythology.
'J Considered Striking

f~,
today as perceptive
pagan character.
dualism.
Strict
'!l asceticism.

265
 New Pagao Pagao pagao Pagan
Paganism,
traditional dualism dualism dualism dualism peculiar to
9-12 9-12 centuries 9-12 centuries 9-12 centuries large degree
qualification c:enl1JriesAD. A.D. A.D. A.D. to a city.
and dating until the 9-12 centuries
""sent A.D.

Relation Old Testament Derial Denial of the Denial of the Mentioned

Old Testament Old Testamenl: rriy in Iale
to the Old not menliooed 01 ... 00
ge<>e<31y Testament is rnputed. is imputed. wriliogs.
Testament

Presence Has prmary PlillilY No sourteS. NosourteS. Has primacy

of primary SOU"", scuces Ilal ~ All materials All materials sou"'"
has(_ are late: Sf! late:
Sources n 1945) refiAe translations translations
et""
• I and Caltlolic and Catholic
altrisili criticism criticism

Relation Uoi<nowo Valunla", self- Volunlary self- Volunlary setf- No

castration of castration of castration of
to "the fulfilled' priests
priests
castration

Similar
features
--
of ZOroasIrism
Matter hf lIesh Matter and lIesh
01 man aealed 01 man aealed
Pr.l<:tical~
Ildistinguisha
Main goal is
peoceplion of
God._
............
is AIua Mazda by an evil god,
"'''''Y''
by an evil god,
satan, an:! cQy
bIe Irom
Manichees in and revelation.
..... 01"
"... .,.,. ......
ililalp""ZI '9
scdwasgiYen III SOlA is !PYen
""''''01
_tal

""""
.... Sons ...

"""' .......
twnsafAhn ""II."... ..,""'
God"""
"
..........
..,.,.
"iN istie world"
...... (.... 01 The Maid ees

..........
Hoifless) and hod ....
Baptisi,1S. T~
Ch isllallS'

1.... ""'-1
- ...
Mony 01 """.
~
Mony

Trinity: Father
and Son 01 EYI
-.-
""""""" """
and so on.
they called
inslaIalicn of

rinals.
and Son of
Good
"""""'os
"1JUe Christians'
Tmity: Father,
sonofevil:of
Trinity: Father,
Son of Evil and ""'M
(Demiurge) 300
"",of

.....,.
"'" of Good
5a1~alioo go<Xl=spirit
(Christ)

-
ascetidsmand

266
 Notes Castration Practically Hennitism
motifs present indistinguisha 'unexpectedly
in mythology ble from • becomes
Manlcflees in popular in
~;' fundamental
motifs
Europe in
1200-1300,
especially
I'
[-
a""""
craftsmen and
alchemists.

The table demonstrates the surprising similarity of the notions

of all these beliefs which are divided only by some difference of the
titles and names of the prophets.
The history of the Cathars, which was compiled according to
allusions in the writings of Christian authors, is especially interesting.
There are no other written sources. The original documents were
burnt by the Inquisition, were lost. decayed ... Generally, they
disappeared.
Only two Latin tronslatio71s of what is considered today
primary sources were preserved:
"The Book of the Two Princi pies" and "Jean de Lugio from
Bergamo" .
The authorshi p of the second anonymous source in general is
vaguely and hesitatingly ascribed to Parfait Barthelemy of
Carcassonnc.
All the remaining literature about the Cathars are the works of
Catholic clergy and philosophers which contain extremely
contradictory information.
They report that the Cathars (from the Greek katharor - pure)
are followers supposedly of a Christian heresy which arose in the
south of France and in Italy in the 11th century and practically
wcre destroyed during the well-known crusades (1209-1229.)
The basic idea of their teaching is the division of the world
into material and spiritual spheres. of which the material is the
receptacle of Evil. Our world. thus, was created by Satan. by
Dcmiurge, which in the Cathar sects of the lS-16th centuries was
equated with the god of the Old Testament. Inasmuch as in the
philosophy of the Cathars a god in no way was able to have a
rdationshi p to the material world, the idea of the appearance of it
in the form of Christ as a man was alien to them.

267
 The Cathars refuted Baptism by water, recognizing the receiving
of communion by sunlight and fire. In other words, they continued
the views of the SUf/- and {ire-worshippers. The Cathar cross was a
symbol of the sun and its radiance. The numerous drawings on the
Egyptian pyramids and other cult structures are evidence of it, as
has already been mentioned. And they called themselves "good
Christians", while venerating the sun beam which they called Jesus.

Stone Cathar crosses in the basement of the Paul-Dupuy museum

in Toulouse (France.) "Jesus Christ" in the Cathar, pagan sense
means "messenger of the spirit", that was sent by God.
The name Christ has one more close meaning by implication.
In the opinion of a number of researchers, it means in general "the
message" or "the tidings". The Messiah, therefore, also is called
the messenger that brings good tidings from God.
As regards sun-worshi p, they also placed crosses with crucified
people on the tops of hills so that these "were more visible" to the
sun, which accepted the offering, as it were, with its rays. So in
the ritual of the crucifixion of a man - of Jesus Christ - who is
described in the New Testament, traces of the influence of the more
ancient beliefs are clear.
The Cathars believed that the soul enters a bodily form again
and again (reincarnation) as punishment for sins. In their belief,
a soul could also enter into an animal; therefore, the consumption
of animals in food was forbidden. One easily notices similar beliefs
in India.
Therefore, the assertions of Catholic sources ring strangely
that Cathars were a Christian heresy. In the Gospels, Jesus is

268
presented mainly as one wbo identifies completely with the god
of the Old Testament. What then about the Cathars? It would be
much more accurate to say that Judaism and the Christianity which
arose from Jesus Christ, being independent teachings, experienced
a definite influence of their own pagan predecessors.
This influence also is expressed in the fact, for example, that
many names in the Bible identify not people, but the main points
in the spirit of the teachings of the Cathars and Bogomils, and
they personify some kind of facets and phenomena of life. The
Gnostics have Cain and Abel - Archons, that is the proto-essence
of a complex pagan hierarchy. They carry out that very same role
in the Bible.
The scholar Nikolai Morozov in one of his works cites the true
meaning of the names Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel, which today are
accepted by us as the personal names of the heroes of the Old
Testament, of the forefathers of mankind. And then the story
about Adam and Eve sounds thus:
"Man was married to Life, and she bore him Labor and Rest.
Labor killed Rest" ... and so on.
The influence of the Gnostics appeared especially strikingly
in the Apocryphal Gospel of John; it is one of the main reasons
why the Gospel is considered false.
The error of late authors and critics in describing the religions
of the Cathars, Bogomils and other varieties of Gnosticism as
"heretical" centers in the fact that they maintain that this faith
rejected the holy cannon of the Jews and the Christians. Our
correction comes down to the fact that they did rIOt know anything
about any such cannon until it was introduced by force. Their
religion was the original basis, once common to all, out of which
the later faiths were developed by editorial redactors long after
the fact. One could say that it was the essential substratum of
Christianity but without the deification of Jesus.
Scholars have often come to similar conclusions. For example,
Ralph Cudworth (1617-1688, England), using the research of the
Dutchman, Gerhard Vossius, asserted that the pagan Greeks knew
a single god (since they lived later than it was acceptable to
consider), and that there had been no Manicheans.
The geography of the Cathar belief is vast. it is practically all
the territory of Europe, from Spain to Bosnia. Everywhere throughout

269
this region there are records of this religion, although the primary
concentration of Cathars is the south of France and Italy (1150-
1250 A.D.). We emphasize: it is a question of the 12-13th centuries
of our era when, according to the traditional chronology, Christian
monotheism had supposedly been uncontested for a long time in
the world.
The other trend, the Balkan Bogomils, is recognized officially
today as identical to the Cathars in religion, although reports
about it include additional pagan details. For example, the Bogomils
thought of the god of good and the god of evil as blood brothers,
which is typical of a multitude of pagan beliefs and practicaJly
blends with a similar legend in Zoroastrism.
The Bulgarian Presbyter Cosmas's "Sermon" on Bogomilism
(traditionally 920 A.D., as a matter of fact the 15·16th century), in
biting form while discussing the Bogomils, puts forth a direct question:
"And how can they call themselves 'Christians', when they don't
have priests to Baptize them, when they don't make the sign of the
cross, when they don't sing priestly hymns and don't respect priests?"
We agree with the author. Bogomils are not Evangelical, but
pagan Christians.
An analysis of the faiths, which have disappeart.'<i or which
reign today in the world, convinces that there is not one religious
teaching in the world which escaped the huge influence of its
predecessors. All of them are literally twisted among themselves,
as though spilling over one into the other. Over the millennia the
basic notions, symbols and ideas have been preserved. At every
new stage of social development they are fi lied with additional
content, and sometimes change their own meaning. But in any
case they endure in the spiritual life of people. Therefore, when
they talk about the uniqueness of one or the other religion, that, in
our view, is deeply in error. Jewish monotheism is a typical example
of what we are talking about.

270
COMMON FEATURES
OF THE EMPIRE CHAPTER FOURTEEN

The vast majority of works which have been created by

traditional historians contain, as we see, distortions and
insurmountable contradictions. Just what is one to believe? In
our opinion, only the facts. This is, of course, uncommonly difficult,
because they are quite often replicated widely and spread by the
adherents of the Scaligcr chronology into different epochs and
centuries by those who created chimerical antiquity in the 16-
19th centuries.
Here is a short list of doubles from "antiquity" and the Middle
Ages (Vladimir Ivanov);
Virgil - Virgil Polydore (The Much-Wise?) of the IS-16th
centuries.
Livy - Tita Livia (da Forti) of the 15th century.
Hieronymus - Erasmus of Rotterdam of the 15-16th centuries.
Augustille - Lorenzo Valla of the 15th century.
\Iitruvius - Leon Battista Alberti of the 15th century.
Theophrastus - Paracelsus Thoophrastus of the 16th century.
Hipparcos - Tiho Brage of the 16th century.
AristarcJws of Samos - Nicolaus Copernicus of the 16th century.
Archimedes - Kepler, Galilco of the 16- 17th centuries.
Ptolemy - a number of authors of the 15-16th centuries.
Euclid - a number of authors of the 15-16th centuries.
Albertus Magnus - a number of authors of the 16th century.
Shakespeare· a number of authors of the 16-17th centuries.
Rabelais - a number of authors of the 16-17th centuries.
Jesus Christ - a number of figures of the 15-17th centuries.
And nevertheless, we attempt to determine just what it was in
reality in the Limes which played a decisive role in the formation
and development of modern civilization. From time-to-time we
have to repeat in a few words what already has been said, and
many positions will be confirmed only in subsequent chapters, but

271
these deficiencies are unavoidable, since it is impossible to talk
about all of them at once.
Let us recall that we do not have precise reference points in
geographic titles and names, and even worse - in the dating of
events which occurred before the 18th century. Some researchers
thin k that this is the result of some kind of worldwide conspiracy
which is directed at distorting the history of one country or another,
minimizing its importance in the saga of mankind and concealing
facts which are extremely disagreeable for someone.
It is wrong to go to such extremes. In our opinion, everything
that we have in the traditional history today is a result of a gradual
layering of errors and distortions via an adjustment of past events
under a knowingly incorrect model which was dictated by
•
momentary pol itical interests. A practice which has been spread
broadly even in our days.
The incorrect chronological model, contrived by numerologists
and astrologers in the 16th century, played the decisive role. As we
have already noted, the erroneous interpretation of a whole series of
fundamental ideas, such as "the start of a new era", "after the birth of
Christ", etc., and also key words in the definition of temporal intervals
made their own contribution to the distortion of history. For example,
the basic meaning of the Latin word saeculum: "generation".
Meanwhile, it often is treated and translated as "century". (Anan'ev
et al. The Complete Latin Dictionary. 1862, page 760. But if in
one text is written "7 centuries ago", and in another is "7 generations
ago", then the difference is, at a minimum, 500 years (V.Kesler).
Such is the trustworthiness of many key words.
The situation with geography is even more confused. A
mediaeval author, when referring to Rome, Troy, Egypt, Palestine
or Galilee was able, depending on his education and local tradition,
to name many differcnt places, and in the majority of cases these
are not those places and cities which bear these names today.
The mention by an old French author of the burning of Troy had
a meaning for him different from that which a later author in
England had in mind. A spiritual verse of the "People of God"
sect, which was formed in Russia in 1645 runs:
"Along the bluc Khvalinsk and worldly sea, they sailed -
the guests appeared - the shi ps' captains from distant cities, of
Israelitc tribes. The guests sailed to Jerusalem town, to stone
Moscow..... ("A History of Russian Literature", volume I, St.
272
Petersburg, 1908, page 398).
Moscow, it turns out, was Jerusalem for them, and the Slavs the
tribes of Israel. The disappearance of the names by which OUf
ancestors called themselves and the steady procession of nicknames
like "Great Tsar" 'Ind "Warrior Tsar" add to the difficulties.
Translated into different languages, these are perceived as different
names. A fine example is found in the biographies of the ancient
Egyptian Akhnaton and the mediaeval Constantine V, who coincide
even down to small details. But we will return to this again.
In order to reestablish a correct sequence of events and the
correct chronology, one must define priorities in the research and a
scale of historic sources.
One must acknowledge that the most reliable basis in the building
of a chronology lies in the strict methods of mathematical modeling
and astronomical calculation, since the probability of forgery in the
draWing, for example, of a zodiac is very small. Anatoly Fomenko
and his followers have demonstrated this most strikingly.
Among the written sources those are more important in which
there are no descriptions of political events: these descriptions,
unfortunately, always are tendentious. Trust in various codes, laws,
notes, recei pts and in general any documentation "not intended
for hcir~" is much greater.
Relying. on them, we can say with confidence that European
civilization is the oldest and therefore most developed in the history
of mankind. It was a long time coming to its qualitative leap, which
occurred by 800-900 of the new era, jf one is to usc the terminology of
tmditional history. The leap was conditioned by the massive transition
to settling down and farming, initially in the Mediterranean region,
which is the one most favorable for human habitation.
Written sources almost do not exist from the subsequent two
centuries since written language had only just originated in the
form of hieroglyphs.
Only the analysis of such an objective and reliable a process as
the development of technologies can render reliable indirect aid
in the study of this period. It shows that, on the threshold of the
second millennium, the smelting of iron was discovered; the mining
of ore and coal began, and the horse appemed on the list of domestic
animals. It was nearly impossible to be involved with metallurgy
in the nomadic way of life, and it wasn't even necessary for the
nomads. Only the needs of the economy were able to force people
273
to search for more effective materials for the creation of implements
and a more powerful drafting force for working the fields. These
discoveries determined the rapid development of the regions with
an abundance of iron are deposits and coal for coking, especially in
Central Europe.
A network of petty agricultural princi palities and small city-
states covered the Europe and Asia of that time. The linguistic
and religious diversity in the conditions of such fragmentation
undoubtedly was enormous, even though fertility sun cults
predominated there. They worshi pped the gods of the sun, winds,
sky and rain. In a word, anything that influenced crop capacity.
There were no discussions of evangelical Christianity, Judaism, Islam
or Buddhism. Their time still had not arrived. It was still
necessary to grow into their use of abstract ideas of high complexity,
like an "omnipresent and unseen God".
By the 11th century, the development of the economy had
reached a level where it became possible to allot part of the
accumulated social product for the maintenance of regular troops.
The early stages of a professional army had appeared.
It is important to emphasize this for the following reasoo. In
all "ancient" writing, and also in the historic works which arc
devoted to "ancient" troops, it tells about armies of hundreds of
thousand warriors who are armed in the last word of the military
equipment of that day. For example,ancient Persia is named,which
equi pped a two hundred thousand man army for campaigns. Even
the Bible didn't avoid giant mania. The results of a census of the
Israelites - partici pants of Moses' military campaign - are cited in
the Book. They amounted to six hundred thirty five thousand
five hundred fifty men of draft age.
These are assertions which have nothing in common with
reality. A theory developed by the most prominent military leaders
and military theoreticians of the world shows that no country,
either past or present, can sustain all army in which marc than 5
percent of the male population is involved. Ten percent is already
an economic and military catastrophe: a state is unable to maintain
an army of this size, supplying it with all its necessities and
replenishing it as necessary during military operations with fresh
and full-fledged replacements without interruption.
A professional army, and only profeSSionals can wage war
successfully, appeared only when society was able to allocate part
274
of its accumulated total product for it. That is, in the Middle
Ages.
The whole northern Mediterranean region there and then
immediately began to "simmer", militarily. The southern regions,
although richer, began to lag behind in armaments from lack of
iron deposits, coal and metallugical trechnology. And the further
south, the greater the discrepancy.
In 1150·1200, a decisive leap ensued. This was the invention
of the iron horseshoe, without which the use of horses is not possible
at all, led to the appearance of military cavalry which had an
incontestable advantage over infantry.
The military expansion of the technologically advanced northwest
against the richer southern regions developed into a war of a global
scale. This was the first world war in the history of mankind.
Accounts of its early stages and of the process of the empire's
creation in the historic chronicles are obscured and confused
with descri ptions of subsequent wars in the period of its collapse.
For this reason, determining what happened will be a pursuit of
many decades. However, let us try to formulate what is already
clear today.
We assume that the initial expansion, we shall call it
conditionally the first crusade of Alexander the Great, began from
the territory of the Balkans and enveloped most of the inhabited
land in southern Europe and southern Asia, all the way to Kashmir
in India and to north Africa, including Ethiopia.
Once begun, this expansion (i.e., the empire's enlargemenl)
continued without interruption through its own momentum. There
is not in the history of mankind an empire which did not strive
for the steady expansion of its borders and spheres of influence.
The empire's victorious professional army reached the point at
which it dictated to the center rather than being governed by it.
It needed a permanent war. Otherwise, there would be no more
plunder, promotions, or glory to propel victorious commanders into
prominence. Worse yet, profeSSional warriors do not possess any
skills except military ones; in peacetime they are not only all but
useless, but potentially dangerous as well. After the world wars of
the 20th century the demobilized conseri pts came to be known as
the "lost generations".
In the final analysis, a permanent war leads to a catastrophic
exhaustion of material al,ld human resources, thus weakening the
275
center of the empire. So it was with the first empire· all the way
down to the events of the "fourth" crusade, which was the start of
its collapse.
The campaigns were not called crusades by accident. Any
military operation requires a spiritual underpinning, a shared
conviction of the rightfulness of the assault. Troops need to be
inspired by the justice of the war. Otherwise, they will shirk or
fight without enthusiasm, and this augers defeat.
The ideal basis of the initial expansion was reflected in the
religious chronicles as the right of the "people of Israel" to the Holy
Land which was given to them by God. It is noteworthy that
Moses' troops, who were making the campaign, were divided into
twelve tribes of troops which received, as their reward after the
victory, twelve vast territories with their cities and fields. The
secular chronicles describe the conquest as the first crusade for the
possession of the Holy Land and its purification from the
"unbelievers". The empire's territory also was divided into 12 Thema.
Such a definition of "crusade" does not resonate in the least
with the Christian conception of a "just war" in the modern
understanding of this word. We shall allow ourselves here to
recall again that the Christian cross appeared long before Jesus
Christ as a symbol of the sun, and that "Jesus Christ" in the Qatari
(i.e., pagan) understanding means "Messiah of the World", or "Light
of the World". By the way, these words had many different meanings
in various centuries, as reflected in the Gnostic texts - for example,
in the Apocryphal Gospel of John.
We postulate that, when the empire was formed, four main
power blocs contested for supremacy: from the west, the Latin;
from the north, the Slavic·Gothic; from the east, the Semitic; and
from the south, the Ethiopian.
The war of the Latins with the Slavic~Goths (in Egyptian
texts called the Kheta), was a long one which ended with peace.
The Slavic-Gothic influence was immense. Evidence of it is found
over a huge territory - all the way to India, where Sanskrit is
indistinguishable from Protoslavic and one of the tribes there has
even preserved the ancient name "Arians" (Aryan, the progeny of
the largest branch of Gnosticism).
The initial conquest in many ways displays an economic
character. The less wealthy northwest went to war against the
southeast for the sake of conquest of the fertile land there. As the
276
Old Testament maintains, by the Ii ps of the Lord it was said:
") have come down to deliver them (the People of Israel) out
of the hand of Egyptians and to bring them up out of that land to
a good and broad land, a land flowing with milk and honey".
(Exodus 3:8).
Thus, the first crusade was a Volkswanderung. Women, old
men and children rode in carts behind the army in order to settle
the conquered places once and for all with families, kin and clans.
In the history of mankind such a campaign has been repeated only
once; this was the settlement of America, where the newcomers
cleared a place under the sun for themselves with fire and sword.
They maintained that these lands were promised to them by
God. From the point of view of the people of the 21st century,
their claims seem doubtful. All of us today are convinced that the
right to possess one or another territory is born out of the
longstanding residence of that or the other people on it. But it
wasn't always so. All the way up to the 19th century, they were
conquering territories which was considered a weighty argument
in the disputes about to whom they belonged. If I won it, that
means it is mine! Variations of such assertions were afterwards
repeated more than once in the aggressive wars of the most diverse
empires. They resound in all might, as we see, even in the Bible.
One would like to emphasize that practically in all the
chronicles which were spread both geographically, and on the
scale of time, two great political figures are reflected. Let us call
them conditionally CONQUEROR and REFORMER, although
these figures are merged in some variants.
The personality of Conqueror has been duplicated many times.
Here is an incomplete list of his "reflections":
"The ancient Egyptian Ramses II := Alexander the Great :=
Diocletian = Justinian := Charlemagne := Joshua. Details of this
unusual biography are repeated in a number of descri ptions of
other figures of the past in the "ancient Egyptian" writings.
In Conqueror's biography a pair of figures often exists: father
and son. For example, a pair of Macedonians and a pair of Ramses':
it is possible that there really were two of them.
Questions immediately arise: why are they "multiplied" on the
pages of the chronicles? And why are they called different names?
We shall recall again that all names cited aoove are not in the
least names, but nicknames. We now perceive, let us assume, the
277
word "Charlemagne" as the name of a concrete ruler. But as a matter
of fact it means only "Great King". They were able to call any ruler
a great king. And if we then identify one particular individual as
"Charlemagne", then this is only on the strength of historic tradition.
No one knows how his parents really named him. And, apparently,
one will never know, because it was not the custom in those times to
give a man the same name from birth to death.
In which connection, these nicknames in and of themselves
also sound differently in different languages. And here appears in
one place, let us assume, King Chlorus, and in another - the Pale.
And not every reader by far understands that this is one and the
same man, because "Chlarus" is also "the Pale" in another language.
Therefore, we also have desigoated the first emperors of the
first empire in the world by the words "Conqueror" and "Reformer".
As regards the doubling of their figures in different chronicles,
this happened as early as after the collapse of the empire, when the
chroniclers and annalists of the newly formed states wrote a
supposedly ancient and glorious genealogy of the new sovereigns.
The history of an empire which had gone out of existence served
them as an abundant source of raw material, full of interesting events.
It was possible to draw facts out of this, and to embellish these as
much as fantasy or expedience required. We have seen this in the
writings both about "ancient" Greece, and about "ancient" Rome,
and about even older "ancient" China. It was extremely easy and
simple to do, inasmuch as, as we have been emphasizing constantly,
there were very few educated people counted in society.
And one more reason for the doubling. Conqueror and
Reformer, as too all people on earth, possessed both positive and
negative qualities. Moreover, their actions, which were recognized
as fine ones in one epoch, were considered reprehensible in another
epoch. And here it suited the chroniclers to separate the bad, in
their opinion, deeds from the good. And since in a number of
cases the "bad" deeds had to be put somewhere, the great figure, as
a rule, gave rise to a "malefactor"- a double, whom the chroniclers
sent into distant antiquity - often with the very same name.
The "good" doubles had one common feature: They were imbued
from infancy with genuine Christianity and devoted their whole
life to its triumph. And among them without fail were the ancestors
of them who ruled the countries during the creation of the
chronicles. The chroniclers fawningly devoted their works to them,
278
the "Magnificent", the "Sun-Like", the "Purple-Clad", and so on
and so on by authors rightly concerned about their daily bread.
Ln reality, life was full, as it is even now, both of meanness and
holiness, only little by little.
In Conqueror's epoch, a single religion still had not been
formed as the empire's ideological basis. There was the
uninterrupted annexation of ever newer and newer lands, and in
the state a mixture of languages and rivalry of cultic paradigms
prevailed. Everyone drew from the local pagan cults whatever was
expedient for the glory of Conqueror. This, in particular, found its
reflection in the legend that Alexander the Great, having conquered
Egypt, took from the hands of the local priests the symbols and
title of the Pharaoh, thus becoming the earthly embodiment of the
sun god. That is, he became a living god. In the east they called
Conqueror the Father of the Khans, or Batu-Khan (Khan Batu); in
the western variant, "Vatican"; in the Gothic variant, "Atilla".
The word "pope" became a key for understanding all subsequent
political processes.
They named Conqueror's capital the Eternal City, or the City of
All the World, or the City of God's Deputy. Such is the sense of the
names in particular in the different languages: "Jerusalem", "Rome",
"Tsarigrad"... A century later they name it Constantinople. The Roman
Catholic Church will do this in the 15th century, after finally being
separated from Byzantium. And it will proclaim Rome as it£ new
capital (the "Eternal City"). The renaming operation was carried
out for justification of the instrument of "Constantine's Donation".
According to it, the papacy supposedly inherited imperial authority
from Byzantium. But when before long in that same century, Lorenzo
Valla showed the spuriousness of "Constantine's Donation," Catholic
Rome began to explain the name of the former Tsarigrad as derived
from the Greek name Constantine. In other words, there was a great
emperor with such a name and the city was named in his honor.
And today we perceive the name of the Eternal City exactly like that.
But the whole secret is that the" word "Constantine" itself signifies in
L.1ti n "Permanen". That is "Eternal".
Italian Rome was founded only at the end of the 14th century;
in the 12-13th centuries it is not found on maps. All mentions of
the "Rome" of that period have to refer the city on the Bosporus.
The Bosporus was the ideal central location in the most
developed region on the planet in those days. It was a stone's
279
throw from there to the rich provinces. It was the most convenient
place of all for delivering thc abundant tribute by water from the
conqucred territories. f\:nd what is more, the place of eternal peace
is fairly near. We have in mind the Valley of the Kings in Egypt.
By the way, no one knew Egypt as such. They called it Mitzl'im,
which has been retained up to now in Hebrew. But "Egypt" was
moved around freely according to the chronicles of the annalists
wherever they liked, all the way up to the 16th century. "Syria"
and "Palestine" were moved around with it at the same time.
For example, the Egypt, Syria and Palestine of the fourth crusade
occupy the territory of the modern Czech Republic, Bulgaria, Ukraine,
Byelorussia, Poland and Russia, that is of Eastern Europe. This
sounds ridiculous to modern people. For the annalists of the Middle
Ages however, it was completely normal. After all, they were not
able to know what their descendants would later call the Eastern
European countries.
The dual-headed eagle, which is looking to the West and to
thc East, became the main symbol of Imperial power. The eagle has
been regarded as a symbol of power since the most ancient of
times. It was associated with the sun, fire and light; also as a
symbol of fertility and masculine strength. In the opinion of the
Swiss psychoanalyst, Carl Gustav Jung, "the utmost significance of
this symbol is the idea of height".
The eagle is encountered practically in all corners of the planet,
including the Incan civilization in Central America. Therefore,
many researchers suppose that the empire already had reached
American then. Not only does the double-headed eagle point to
this, but also the fact that Christopher Columbus took with him as
a translator a man who knew Hebrew. And when the boat'i of the
seafarcr approached the shores of Cuba, the translator in particular
alighted first on the shore. Columbus expected that the natives
would understand Hebrew.
After the death of Conqueror, Reformer came to power. He is
named in different ways in the chronicles: Octavian Augustus =
Constantine the Great = Constantine V (Copronymus) = Amenhotep
IV, or Akhnaton.
If Conqueror mainly captured lands and collected tribute,
then Reformer was supposed to govern a huge empire ill relatively
peaceful conditions; this turned out to be somewhat morc difficult
than fighting. The emerging single state system found itself
280
obliged to cope with the most profound disparities in the religious
and linguistic spheres. Local religious cults and the diversity of
languages in tile absence of a single written system proved to be
the centrifugal force which threatened to tear the empire apart.
Modern man mainly identifies himself according to his "roots",
by which are meant, besides the rest, language, customs, ceremonies
and rituals, including religious ones. In tile times about which we
are speaking, religion was the main identifying feature. As a result,
people in different places were praying to tlleir own gods, but not
to the god of the mother country. For this reason they did not
consider themselves as a unified population of the new mega*
state. It is not necessary to elaborate on this. Political distemper
raged throughout the empire. Local beliefs generated a growing
separatism, effectively demonstrating that continuity of authority
in the capital had not been secured ideologically.
Immediate measures were required everywhere to instill into
the minds of the people the idea of the legitimacy of the imperial
power. This was proclaimed to be of divine origin, ruling.out any
impulse toward opposition. People were supposed to pray to one
god, the god of the emperor. The status of a Pharaoh - of a living
god - did not help in regions where no one knew anything about
the Sun god - Ra - and didn't want to know anything. It was
necessary to create a collective religious and ideological foundation,
uniform throughout the whole sphere of the Ecurnene.
Such a foundation was found with the help and support of
the Semite power block, which was close to Reformer not only in
spirit, but also in family ties.
According to the Reformer's biography, his mother was born
in the East, and her language was distinguished from that ordinarily
spoken in the capital.
This detail is tracked in the biographies of Akhnaton,
Constantine the Great, Constantine V. and is also reflected in the
biography of Moses. From all appearances, Reformer spoke Hebrew
or its cousin -Aramaic - from childhood. In one of the sources it
says that Akhnaton was the second son of Amenhotep III and
Queen Tiy, an Israelitess.
There are grounds to suppose that Reformer was introduced to
the idea of a single God by his mother - an idea already articulated
and developed by priests in the East. It is clear that this idea did
not overthrow the other gods finally and irrevocably. The Judaic
281
monotheism, even in a mature, complete form preserves traces of
links with its predecessors. For example, it says in the Torah: "Who
is like Thee, 0 Lord, among the gods?" (Exodus 15:11). Only
afterwards did the Lord become as he is portrayed today. His basic
features are asserted in the Psalms and the Books of the Prophets.
We find the Egyptian trail both in the Apocrypha and the
legends of the Middle Ages. In some of them it is asserted that
before he became a prophet of Israel, Moses was an Egyptian priest.
The transition to a belief in the One God resolved a mass of
problems. It represented not only quantitative changes (one deity
instead of many), but also qualitative: one God is common in all
manifestations. And to him in particular, the only one, was the
emperor faithful. A conclusion followed from this - one most
important for Reformer: if God is One, then also the emperor and
the empire answer to Him alone. This is expressed more succinctly
in the formula: "One God - one emperor - one empire". There were
not supposed to be any deviations from this.
The over-simplification of religion was colossal. A unique
narrowing of the quantity of characters and over~simplification of
rei igious life.
At the same time, the new religion delivered a most powerful
blow to local beliefs by forbidding the veneration of "idols". The
single God is invisible; this is one of his main qualities. But if so,
then there can be no visible images of him. The third commandment
of the Torah says about this: "You shall not make yourself a graven
image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that
is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth".
(Exodus 20: 4).
Therefore, anyone who worshi ps "idols" is a pagan and subject
to punishment. An extremely easy and effective method of
discovering dissent. One only has to find who has an idol or a
fetish and one can use on the free-thinker all means of influence all
the way up to execution. There is direct evidence of the crime.
The prohibition against images was reflected in the process of
the creation of the zodiac, which was extremely popular in those
times. In general, they stopped drawing them over a rather
extended period. Here are the datings of the Egyptian zodiacs
which were made by the mathematicians Anatoly Fomenko and
V.. Kravtsevich in 2001-2002:
Long Denderah zodiac· April 22 - 26, 1168 A. D.
282
 Round Denderah zodiac - morning of March 20, 1185 A. D.
The Upper Athribis zodiac: May 15-16, 1230 A. D.
The Lower Athribis zodiac: February 9-10, 1268 A. D.
Big Esna zodiac - March 31 ~ April 3, 1394 A. D.
Small Esna zodiac - May 6 - 8, 1404 A. D.
... and later.
In the interval between the middle of the 13th century and
almost until the end of the 14th, they didn't draw zodiacs. And
this was the time of the rule of Reformer and his heirs. The
introduction of the maxim, "do not create any graven image" in
this case turned out to be extremely useful.
One more brillianl discovery is the prohibition to pronounce
God's name. In that way he became supranational. No one was
able any longer to take Him for himself, calling him his own way:
Zeus, Perun, Jupiter or somehow else. Only especially trusted people
know the name of the Lord. All the rest call him simply God, or
Master of the World, or Creator. In that way, one more fundamental
support is dislodged from beneath local beliefs.
Practically every page of the Torah is evidence that Judaism is
aimed most of all and chiefly against paganjsm. The idea of the
terrible depravity of a deviation from monotheism and a return to
the "golden calf" and similar idols is a recurrent theme of its
Books. In and of themselves the books of the Old Testament are
the Israelites', that is of those who struggled against God, field
manual in the war against local beliefs.
However, the invisible and nameless God was to prove too distant
from people who were accustomed to turning to their idols with
requests, wishes and demands. The faith of a simple people will not
tolerate the abstract. Even mystics try to reveal the so called Supreme
Being or "Something". For ordinary people, even more so - for the
uneducated, a concrete nature and trusting re1ationshi p with the
deity are needed. In the shamanism of the northern peoples and the
beliefs of many African tribes the custom has been preserved to this
day to punish their idols if they do not fulfill requests. They simply
burn them or throw them into the garbage pits.
It was necessary to bring the Creator close to his creations.
Therefore, God in Judaism is represented as someone who is
endowed with understandable human qualities. He is kind and
just, but tends to be extremely wrathful, too. At times He even
loses His sense of proportion, craving to punish apostates from the
283
true faith, and then Moses persuades him, not without difficulty,
to change His wrath to mercy, using various arguments. God comes
to His senses and agrees with the wise interlocutor. That is, He
behaves Himself io a perfectly human way.
The believers turn to Him with requests and desires, calling
Him Father, pastor, judge, etc. He hears them out and notes in the
Book of Destiny how who is behaving himself during the year.
And depending on the behavior of people He determines who is to
live next year and for whom the time has come to depart for the
world beyond. The heavenly accounts department operates without
any interruptions.
It is notable that God uses a Book in particular. In our view,
this detail points again to the time of the Torah's creation. It was
written when people stopped using clay tablets and scrolls for
correspondence: when books had appeared. .
Monotheist priests, who were distinguished by the rite of
circumcision as a symbol of union with the divine, became
intermediaries betwccn God and the people. The time of the "pure"
castrati had passed irretrievably. But inasmuch as they had not
intended to yield their dominating position in society like lambs,
the replacement of the priestly elite was accompanied by a massive
repression.
Even the official history makes note of this. True, this is from
the position of the Seal igcrian chronology. It is reported that
"Emperor Constantine The Great declared by special decree in 325
any type of castration to be illegal. Punishment by death was
threatened for the act of castration. Many priests were banished
or confined to monasteries. For cxample, the brotherhood of the
Topes monastery in the mountains of today's Turkey at one time
consisted exclusively of eunuchs".
Even the provinces resisted. Therefore, as the official history
recognizes, "starting from Constantine the Great, the government
interfered in matters of dogmatism and dictated these at its own
discretion... By no means did state interests always coincide with
church intercsts." If one considers that as "church" here arc named
the interests of the Cathar and other pagan cults and movements,
then one can agree with this assertion.
Reformer convokes a council in the Bithynian city of Nicaea.
In later chronicles it was reflected and split into a good dozen
councils of the Roman Catholic Church, which were attributed by

284
the Scaligerian chronology to the depths of the ages. Therefore,
one can determine only approximately what happened at it. ''The
number of council members who arrived is unknown precisely...
The minutes (documents) of the Nicaean council have not been
preserved. Some even doubt whether the proceedings of the council
were even compiled", write the historians.
Nonetheless, they refer to information which supposedly was
kept in the "writings of the council partici pants and historians".
That is, one historian wrote something, another took the writing
all in good faith, and as a result, we have a tale about how the true
faith struggled with the Aryan heresy within the framework of the
Christian church.
As a matter of fact, it was a fight of the Israelite strugglers
against God with paganism. But although "the emperor, who even
led the debates, presided at the council", victory was not achieved.
The stakes in this struggle were too great. Outwardly, everything
came to differences in the interpretation of religious ideas. In
reality it was a question about ideological supremacy in the empire.
At this point Reformer used a tried remedy: a holy war w.as
begun with the "non-bel ievers".
It was reflected in the Western chronicles as a crusade against
the Cathars and the Arab conquest of Europe. It is called
Albigensian, and original evidence has been preserved about it. It
says in it directly that the introduction of a new religious
identification was the purpose of the punitive expedition. It is one
of the least distorted pages of history, with only the correction
that the religion of the Cathars is paganism, and the Catholicism
of that time is Protojudaism, that is Judaism without the Talmud.
In the Eastern chronicles the campaign was reflected as a
Jihad of "Moslems" in response Lo the conquest of the Crusaders.
As a matter of fact, the Koran still had not been written. There is
a lot of various information which is evidence of that. The English
before the 17th century never once used the words "Moslem, Islam,
Koran, minaret, muezzin, hijra, or Caaba". And you see, the sons of
an obscure Albion already had visited by that time all the countries
of the world and should have known them. Neither Francis Bacon
nor William Shakespeare knew anything about Moslems.
It would seem the Russians who lived since ancient times
alongSide the Islamic world were supposed to know who the
Moslems were. Nothing like it. In the Cathedral Code of 1649 it

285
says (in translation into the modern language):
"But if a Busurman by some kind of means, by force or by
deceit, wins over a Russian man to his Busurman faith and moreover
circumcises him... then the Busurman is to be put to death, burned
without any mercy".
They called Jews who collected the taxes "Busurmen" in those
times. (Yaroslav Kesler).
The first Russian researcher of the Koran, the historian
Tatishchev, wrote that only four people, including a Tatar, were
able to read the Koran in all Russia. And you see this was already
the 18th century.
There a curious mention of Mahomet in one of the long-ago
works which is devoted to the magnet:
"A magnet, as you all know, has great properties, without
which it is impossible to sail the seas that surround the world, and
without which it is impossible to know either the sides or the
limits of the earth. The coffin of the Persian prophet Mahomet
hangs over the earth in their Rapatta, in Derbent".
That is, there still were no mosques, but there were Rapattas,
and Mahomet was some kind of wonder-worker. In general, in
European culture the figure of Mahomet was originally an object of
various accusations and charges of treachery, cruelty and carnality.
Magical legends also arose, as, for example, this one - about the
coffin of Mahomet hanging in the air. But for some reason he is
not an Arab, but a Persian.
But let us return to the empire.
A wave of religious persecution swept over all Europe and
Asia. Both the names of gods and their images were forbidden;
rigid standards of dress and relations of the sexes were introduced
- in lllany respects with an Eastern bias. Pagan temples and
sculptures were destroyed. Legends written about the destruction
of Rome by the barbarians are distortions of these events.
The coming to power of a Semitic group in Rome signified a
transition to an Aramaic~Hebrcw language standard, and this
strengthened the positions of the Semitic regions and weakened
Latin Europe. Here is why the traditional history believes that
the "dark time of the all-European decay" arrived. It is also called
a time of huge influence of Eastern and Arabic culture. Supposedly
the Arabs gave Europe mathematics, astronomy and medicine.
Everything is correct: But only not Arabs, but an Aramaic, Semitic

286
This is how Tsarigrad looks in S/ledel's picture from 1493.
The crosses on the walls, the shield wilh the two-headed eagle on fhe gale, and tile minarets alongside
the Saint Sophia lemple. on one of the minarets !here is either a mullah or a Turlt Everything, it would
seem, corresponds to the chtonides. Only the windmills put one on their guard. The point is /hal until fhe
middle of tile 16'" cenlUIf, windmiNs did 1IOl8XisI fot a banal reason -Ihe Flemings began to build them
only in the 1(1' cenlUl)'.
"Mills on lIestJes, tile so-ulled GemJan mills, WlIf8 unril the mit:IdIe ofllle 16'" century me only ones
known. Slrong storms were able to oveffum such a millogelher will! the flame, In the middle oIlhe 16'"
century, one Fleming found a method, by means 01 w/IicIJ this loppMg 01 a mill was made impossible. H8
made only lhe lop movabJe on /he mil, and so mal lhe I:Mades rumed in the !rind, it was necessary only to
tum lhe lop, while the mill buikfing was fixed sdidty 10 the (JIOIJf"IIf (Karl Marx: Machines, page 32),
II is cleM /hat the mills in ShedeI's pkture obviously af8 flOIgantries, but very real ones wtIk:h BI8 fixed
solidly 10 the foundation. This means $hedeI's picture relates not 10 1493, but to 1593.

group. It was not divided in a practical way into Hebrew and

Arabic. All the way to the end of the 15th century, the Israelites
prayed in Hebrew in temples with minarets and wrote prayers in
Arabie and Hebrew.
"The root of the word 'Arab' is RAV, and the prefix ,\ at the
beginning is a Hebrew attributive term, the same as the Greek d,
although the tramcri ption also has changed, since up to the onset
of the printing period spelling was unrestricted everywhere. The
word rabbi originated from the root RAV, the biblical Reuben,
and many other ideas". (Nikolai Morozov).
Reformer's prohibition to pronounce the name of God is
magnificently supported by the famous "Great Chapter" (the Magna
Carta.) The turn of speech "God and the Holy Church" is used
in this huge in dimensions 13 th century state document, but-there is
not one mention of God's name, nor of Christ or of any other
personage of contemporary Christianity.
The uniqueness of the ';Great Chapter" contains also one of
the most ancient mentions of the Judaics (that is Latin "Judges")
and the concrete designation of their role. The Judaies did not
mean the people Jews, as they think today, but meant those with
any state appointment. In particular any, since in those times there

27
 Portrait 01 a mediaeval tax collector.

was no specialization in the bureaucratic machinery and all kinds

of writing and financial operations were entrusted to the caste of
bureaucrats - the Judaies. By the way, the English word judge is
from that same root, and it will be understood why.
There are many prohibitions in Vatican bulls against Christians
being involved with money-lending, with a direct instruction that
this occupation is entrusted only to the Judaies. The Judaies were
the Vatican's financial employees and the majority of the income
collected was sent to the Papal treasury.
The traditional history says that with the "Proto-Renaissance"
in 1212-1492, the Spanish and Portuguese won back the Jberian
Peninsula from the Moors (the "Reconquista").
That same period is described in Eastern sources as the "Tatar-
Mongolian yoke," which lasted approximately 260 years, starting
from Genghis Khan and ending with the "Great Standing at the
Ugra River" in 1481 (The time of Ivan the ITT's rule) ..
That same period is characterized by a short-termed "Latin"
conquest of Tsarigrad (1204) and the split of the Byzantine Empire,
afterwards the restoration of "Greek" authority (1261) with
subsequent prosperity and the final fall of Byzantium in 1453.
This date coincides exactly with the date of the end of the "Hundred
Years War" between England and France (1337-1453), which, per

288
se, started far earlier, namely - in 1204, from the French conquest
of the continental possessions of the English kings of the Anjou
dynasty (Normandy, Anjou, Flanders and Guyenne.)
All together these are one and the same events which occurred
in the Israelite-Byzantine Empire, which are described in the
traditional history from various points of view.
Let us move, however, further along the scale of time.
After Reformer, the Wise, that is Solomon, became ruler. But
again this is not the name of a concrete person, but a sobriquet
similar to Archimedes ("Beginning of Beginnings"). The Byzantine
emperors Leo VI the Philosopher and Andronicus 11 Paleologus
claim the role of Solomon. They divide them into several centuries
in the traditional history. But their biographies coincide right
down to the small details. The Bulgarian mathematician and
historian Yordan Tabov discovered this.
The coincidences are not accidental.
Leo VI and Andronicus II are second sons whose older brothers
died in childhood. Both had a brother named Constantine.
The step-brother of Leo VI - Constantine - was crowned emperor,
and then left the historical scene. There also are few reports about
the brother of Andronicus with the same name; but it is known
that the brothers were strained in their relations.
Fate had been favorable since childhood to the future emperors
Leo and Andronicus: they were declared emperors - co-rulers with
their fathers as soon as in early childhood, when they were four
years old each. (Vizantiyskite Vasilevsi page 233 and page 377).
The attentive parents married them very early, before maturity,
when Leo was nearly 16 years old (Vizantiyskite Vasilcvsi page
233 and 40), and Andronicus - nearly 15 years old (Vizantiyskite
Vasilevsi page 377 and 382).
Their wives were named Anna and Teaphana (Theophano)
respectively. At first glance, these are different names; however, one
can decode "Teophana" by implication as Teo + Anna, divine Anna.
In Leo's biography it maintains that Teophana was very devout, for
which they canonized her after death. So the first part of her name
justifies itselr. It is possible that as early as during her life the court
flatterers "lengthened" her original name from "Anna" to "Teophana".
But to her enemies she apparently remained simply Anna.
Formidable enemies invaded during the times of Leo VI and
Andronicus II: the Scythes, who had come from the northem shore of

289
the Black Sea. The "Tauroscythes" of Oleg attacked u.-'O, and the
Tatars - "Scythes" - Andronicus, But it is considered that the "Tatar
hordes" consisted in the 13th century of Russians and Tatars, and
the Khan Nogai is called "Noga" in some sources - a Russian nickname.
The reigns of Leo VI and Andronicus II are noted for conflicts
of the Byzantine church with the Catholic:
- on order of the pope, Leo removes Patriarch Nicholas Mysticus
and begins to oppose the Orthodox pr.iests, The patriarch is restored
soon after Leo's death (Vizantiyskite Vasilevsi pages 237 . 239);
- during the time of Andronicus, a treaty Witll the Catholics is
annulled, and the patriarch is restored (Vizantiyskitc Vasilevsi
page 377).
It is very important to note a rare detail, which is common to
both Leo and Andronicus: both the former and the latter were'
patrons of the sciences and arts. Both played active roles in
legislative activity.
Leo was married four times; after his death problems arose
with the heir to the throne. (Yordan Taoov: "When Kievan Rus Was
Christened"),
And now let us recall the Biblical Solomon:
- he was celebrated for wisdom,
- he was a patron of the arts, he himself composed magnificent
verses,
- he was married many times, and after his death problems
arose with the heir to the throne,
- he was famous for legislative activity.
The Old Testament tells us that a united Israel comes to an
end at Solomon. The country is split into two large parts - into
Israel and Judea. It is absolutely true! The great empire of the
medieval Leo - Andronicus . Solomon disintegrated into the
Western and Eastern.
Problems with successors of the Wise and multi pIe marriages
led to a significant change of dynasties in the "Eternal City" and
the coming to power of an offshoot of the Comneni, who brought
to the capital Greek culture and language instead of the Semitic.
A previously unprecedented disaster· the plague - promoted
the acceleration of the empire's collapse. It befell Europe, by all
accounts, in the middle of the 14th century, although one can recognize
that the dating of this awful pandemic also requires careful scrutiny,
Toe plague was truly the "scourge of God". Before the formation

290
of the empire, diseases had not become pandemic because of relatively
poor communication between regions. The "black death" arrived
by means of the imperial trade and communications routes, and in
short time had gripped all European space. The first pandemic in
the history of mankind had broken out.
A quarantine of regions at the time of the plague disrupted the
established mechanism of interaction of the provinces with the center
and caused a mass of superstitions about the "wrath of the gods." As
a result, an insurrection of zealots erupted, and later a revolution of
Hussites, who called their biggest fortress simply and modestly
"Zion", burst out.
The coming to power of the Comneni put an end to the strict
iconoclastic prohibitions of Judaism. The Comneni were not
"descendants" of King David and, therefore, rejected the concept
of the emperor's selection by God, the head of the "Judaic people",
and partly returned to pagan standards. This immediately placed
the "Saracens," and Europeans called the Byzantines such in
particular, outside the common Israelite caste.
The rejection of imperial strong measures, on the one hand,
provoked a partial rollback to pre-imperial cults, which later was
called the "Renaissance", and on the other quickly led to the state of
affairs against which Reformer had contended. so consistently ~ to
a diversity of religions and the so-called great schism of the Eastern
and Western churches.
This fundamentally important moment in the origin of new
religions appeared by virtue of political necessity. The origin of
states on the ruins of the empire demanded a new self-identification.
This served as the main dynamic in the creation of beliefs which
differed from imperial monotheism. But more detail about this is
in the follOWing chapters.
Comnenus himself was reflected in the eastern later chronicles
as Augustus, who supposedly handed over the symbols of imperial
power to the Slavic grand duke Vladimir Monomakh (who is, in
the western church chronicles, Constantine the Great).
By the middle of the 14th century, the loosening of the empire
took on a character that was catastrophic for Constantinople.
An insurrection of Zealots broke out in Greece (1342-1349), which
is described by Josephus in "The Wars of the Judaeans", One of the
most prominent of the Zealots, Simon Zelotes, was recast afterwards
in the Gospels as one of the apostles of Jesus Christ.

291
 A world war for the imperial crown had begun.
Afterwards glorified by Homer as the Trojan, and also reflected
in the chronicles as the Tarquinian and Gothic wars, it touched
everyone. The most varied regions and pretenders to the throne
entered into combat: Bulgur leaders from the north, from the east
- Turks, from the west - Gauls, Greeks and many others.
The empire collapsed, and this led to a mass change of dynasties
throughout all Europe. Here is the timeline involved according to
the traditional historiography:
1379 - Division of Austria between Albrecht III (of the Albertine
line) and Leopold 1lI (the Stryian line)
1359-1371 - division of Bulgaria into the Turnovo and Vidin
kingdoms.
1396 . Loss of independence - Turkey.
1373-1411 - Brandenburg (Branibor) Rule of the Luxembourgs
before the change to the Hohenzollerns.
1377 - 99 - England. The last Plantagenet, replaced by
Lancasterians.
1382 - 1387 - Hungary. Maria replaced by Bohemian King
Egmond Luxembourg (Sigismund I)
1370 - 1385 . Poland. House of Anjou.
From 1386 . Jagiellon Dynasty, starting from Ladislaus
. Jagiello.
1385 - Portugal. Start of the Avis Dynasty. end of the Burgundy
Dynasty.
1363 - Sweden. End of the Folkung Dynasty.
1357-1371 - Scotland - end of the Bruce Dynasty, arrival of
the Stuart Dynasty.
1396 - Change of the dynasty in Aragon (Berengars,)
Those who were proteges of the former empire were supposed
to leave the scene of history.
The monotheists also left. Part of the previous religious elite
fled from New Rome to the south of France - the old Biblical
heartland. Later, the stay there of the monotheists as fugatives
will be reflected in the Old Testament as the exile of the Judaeans
in Babylon. and in the history of the Catholic Church as the exile
of the popes in Avignon. These events are one and the same.
The majority of Judaies fled to the west. to imperial Semitic
Mauritania. In particular, there the ethnic features of the people
who are later called Jews were formed from the middle of the 14th

292
to the end of the 15th centuries.
The new western elite, full of ambitious intentions, organized
a decisive assault of the former empire's capital, whjch is called the
Fourth Crusade in the traditional history. A new religious~political
idea, originally connected with the execution of the Bogomil Vasily
who had been transformed into the Messiah (i.e., into Jesus Christ)
served as the ideological justification of it. "Punish the
'executioners of Jesus" - this was the official slogan of the crusade.
The ordinary crusaders, while being gathered for war, were
certain that they really were going to chastise the executioners of
Jesus.This is shown by the fact that, on the crusaders' maps,
"Jerusalem" was located immediately outside of Macedonia, in the
Balkans· in the same place where modern Istanbul is located.
The fact that the crusaders were battling not with Moslems,
but with Greeks, is confirmed by a preponderance of the evidence,
linguistic evidence in particular. The word "mosque" (musquette)
was unknown in France before 1351. They did not see minarets
until 1606, they did not hear muezzins (in the form maizin) until
1568, and the present muezzin appeared only in 1823. Imam (in
the form iman) was introduced into lise from 1559.
Even the word "Saracen" (sarrasin) was noted in the French
language simultaneously with the word "synagogue" in 1080, although
these same Saracen~Moslems had invaded the territory of France,
according to the history school books, as early as the 8th century.
After the capture of Jerusalem·Rome~Constantinopleand the
overthrow of Greek rule, a Latin crusader state was formed.
In 1431, at the Council of Basel, the date of the birth of Christ
was introduced for the first time ~ in honor of Jcsus~Vasily, who
had been crucified comparatively recently. At the Council of
Florence in 1439, part of the Greek and Slavic religious elite
recognized Jesus Christ and the leadershi p of the western religious
standards. The epoch of modern Christianity had arrived.
However, not all parts of the former empire recognized the
new Latin masters by any means.
Many of the eastern orders, for example the Turkish speaking
Golden Horde, resisted them. Behind this were those same political
motivations (the formation of independent states, the striving to
separate themselves not only physically but also spiritually from
the former empire, and opposition to Christians, who had declared
themselves the successors of the imperial monotheists) which had

293
precipitated the rupture. The confrontation of these two powerful
blocs - of the west and the east - defined political life for several
centuries thereafter.
Starting around 1400, pressure from the east increases. In 1453,
Mehmet 11 captured the Eternal City with a powerful blow. Mehmet
II, however, behaved himself as a good friend of Christianity.
Traditional history recognizes that "Orthodox" services were
maintained in the churches of Constantinople. The Great Turk
revived the "ancient Greek" arts which, for a Moslem, is unthinkable.
There are reports that Europe asked him to lead the Worldwide
Ecumenical Apostolic Church. From the point of view of the traditional
history, it is inexplicable to ask a Moslem sultan to become the head
of the Ecumenical Christian Church! Therefore, it is impossible to
find even explanations in the historical works. Historians only discuss
the breadth of soul and the tolerant views of Mehmet II.
We will not argue about the soul of the Great Turk. One is at
liberty to express whatever assumption about it he likes. There are
by far more fundamental considerations than this. Chief of them is
that the Moslems still had not separated themselves from the rest
of the world.
All of this lay ahead. But for the time being, Mehmet II treated
the Israelites and Christians as brothers and willingly recognized
their languages, beliefs, and culture.
Greek, as before, remained the state language. In their addresses
to the countries of the West, the sultans used, as a rule, Greek in
particular. Mehmet II also had recourse to Italian, marc precisely,
to its Venetian dialect, to German with elements of Yiddish and
rarely to Latin. Venice throughout the 15 th ccntury used Greck
exclusively in its relations with the Gran Turco.
The patrimonial superiority, that is the Vaticanship, of Mehmet
11 recognized the majority of dynasties, but a previous centrali7.ation
still had not taken place, and religious unity even more so. The
Greek-Orthodox religious elite had left Constantinople. Fletcher
(Giles), author of a description of the State of Muscovy in the 16th
century, writes that the Greek island of Xios became a temporary
Zion for the Orthodox:
"The patriarch, or the chief ruler in affairs of the faith, was
until last year from Constantinople, whom they called the Patriarch
of Zion, which is why that, being banished from Constantinople
(the place of his sojourn) by the Turks, he has moved to the island of

294
Zion, which sometimes is called Xios, where he also has established
his patriarchal seat.
"Russian tsars and clergy have sent to him every year gifts and
have considered themselves spiritually subject to him and subject
to the Church of that place".
There is evidence that the Moslems considered themselves
trne Christians. Mikhalon Litvin cites a curious dcscri ption of
religious customs while speaking about the beliefs of the people
who settled south of modern Russia. Here is an extract from the
tenth fragment:
"The Tatars and Turks, and also other Saracens, have a common
religion, or law. It resembles Judaism (judaismum) and Nestorian
Heresy (lweresim Nestonanum). They recognize a single and whole
(simplicem) God. For they believe in Christ, the holy preacher
and the final judge of the world, who was born of the Virgin, but
who did not suffer the passion. They observe circumcision. But
they execute it at that mature age at which their patriarch Ismail
(Ismahel) underwent circumcision. They say that this sect (secta)
originated in Mecca (Mecha), the city of Arabia, nearly 600 years
after the birth of Christ with the assistance of the Jews (judaeis)
who were resettled there after the fall of Jerusalem, according to
the evil intent of a certain monk and malicious apostate Sergium
(Sergii), for the ruin of Christianity (Christianitatis) ... They blame,
ridicule, reproach us, Christians, because of our great indifference to
divine affairs and the harm, the evil, one brings to another, [while
sayingl that [we are] barbarians, atheists, who accidentally bear
the name of Christ, who do not belong to his faith, and they deem
us as unworthy of relations with them".
The dispute about who the true Christians were was oat in the
least a scholastic one. Very serious political motives stood behind
it. It was a question, in new conditions, about the creation of more
democratically applicable beliefs aimed, in contrast to Judaism, at
enticing masses of people into the number of their adherents.
The victorious Ottoman Empire, as already noted, needed its
own ideology, a moral foundation for its own pretensions. And
this ideology appeared - an even more democratic one than
Christianity. Access to it was open to each and everyone without
any kind of obstacle. There was neither Judaic giyur nor Christian
Baptism. It was enough to pronounce in the presence of witnesses
a phrase that there was no God except Allah, and that Mohammed

295
is his prophet, and you were a Moslem.
Jesus was not rejected completely. He became one of the prophets
who had preceded Mohammed. This inexorably entailed the final
separation of Christianity from the new religion, and simultaneously
from the capital of the empire on the Bosporus, with which Christians
now did not want to have anything in common. The crucifixion of
the God man Jesus=Vasily was transferred to Jerusalem. True, at the
same time there remained in the teachings a multitude of signs pointing
to Constantinople, but such details were not of great concern to
anyone. The perfection of the teachings became the business of
subsequent generations.
Exactly the same picture is observed in Islam. While
considering Jesus a genuine prophet or angel, the Moslems drank
wine with gusto, venerated Apollo and Venus, and painted portraits
of their beloved Mohammed.
The famous physician Avicenna-Abu Ali Ibn Sino, being an
orthodox Moslem, advocated the drinking of wine in accordance
with isLamic Law.
Inscri ptions on Moslem banners were written in Greek.
Moslem women prayed in the temple along with men ("Tales
of a Thousand and One Nights").
They burned adulteresses at the stake; no one knew anything
about the famous and supposedly ancient custom of stoning them.
At the end of the 18th century, Russians were praying in mosques
and synagogues, for example, in Kiev. Moslems prayed to the
Holy Trinity in "leopard skin", and Christians read the Koran
(The Holy Scripture.)
They finally separated Allah from Christianity only in 1878.
The "Orthodox Interlocutor" issued a headline in that year: "On
the separation of churches into Orthodox and Moslem and on the
excommunication of Allah from the Greek Orthodox Church".
The empire of the monotheists was completely forgotten in all
these upheavals. After the passing of several centuries, no one any
longer remembers what it was, or If it even existed at all. The new
history of Europe, which was concocted according to the chronology
manufactured by the former Jew Joseph Scaliger and his followers,
had lied it out of existence. Nonetheless, traces of the empire
endure, because everything that has appeared subsequently is based
on its achievements. And we will learn, through recovering it,
what the realities of the first worldwide state on the planet were.

296
THE VERTICAL LINE OF
CHAPTER FlnEEN

Given the military and technical superiority which an empire

possessed, it was comparatively easy to conquer territory and subdue
scattered tribes. It turned out to be much more difficult to rule
them, to built, as it now is acceptable to say. a "vertical line of
authority", to collect taxes and to organize troops. It is clear that
people knew how to do all of this even earlier. But at no other time
was the government of a state so complex and on such a wide scale.
Those notions about sovereigns and their subjects that were the
foundation of former social structures no longer were suitable for it.
We already have spoken about some of these notions, and even
of the structures as well wbi Ie discussing Egypt and its pharaohs.
Here we would add the following:
The right of the people was viewed as a reflection of the right
of the gods. The king possessed sacral powers; as the representative
of the heavens, he was the keeper of order on earth. He judged and
punished, made offerings and was, it is clear, a military leader.
The princi pie of reign was based on the fundamental idea of
empire: "Authority is from a single God". The sovereign received
it by means of ordination and anointing for reign. The prefix
God's Anointed Sovereign, or Ordained, was added to the namc of
the sovereign - either Christ in Greek or Augustine in Latin.
The pagan, self-willed peoples with their dozens and hundreds
of gods and idols were ni p~d in the bud. ThiS didn't at all mean
that people in the subjugated provinces instantly stopped honoring
the old beloved gods. The cxtermination of paganism was spread
out over many centurics. It has even now not been completely
ended and it hardly will ever be concluded with total victory
ever since many of its features have been organically a'isimilated
into the world's religions.
However, the princi pal objective was accomplished: The

297
ideological paradigm was changed religiously. This change occurred
in a short space of time and, initially, without excessive bloodshed.
The reason for this was that although veneration of the rulers in'
rituals was introduced, everything else remained virtually as it had
been • habitual and, perhaps, even native for the believers.
Indeed, the sovereign, marked by a seal of selectness, became as
before the possessor of wonderful, supernatural qualities. They
rewrote his biography, deriving his ancestry from the Sun or the
Morning Star (Astarte). We find traces in particular of such a
relationshi p to the ruler even during the late Middle Ages. They
called Louis XVI in France the "Sun King." In Rus, Grand Duke
Vladimir was "Red Sun". These are not simply poetic examples
thought up by courtly flatterers, but distant echoes of the existence
of the institution of the holy kings.
They changed not only the biographies for the rulers, but also
the names. They called them by various nicknames, being afraid
of the evil eye that is of the influence of evil forces. It was thought
that if one were to call the sovereign by his real name, then these
forces somehow would see it and cause troubles. They attached
colossal significance to words - especially to names. While creating
the world, the monotheists said, the Lord certainly called the light
"light", the earth "earth" and the sky "sky", as if they would not
have existed unless they had been given names by the Creator.
Thanks to the fcar of the evil eye, the serial names, "Tertius"
(The Third), "Octavius" (The Eighth), appeared and names which
defined appearance of the type Chlorus (the Pale.) These nicknames
often defined the personalities of the rulers: Terrible, Bloody, Most
Gentle... The names of one of the best-known emperors: Diocletian
Gaius Aurelius Valerius, which means, in translation from the Latin
and Hebrew, Recognized by God, the Strong, Golden and Firm.
No one knows what his real name had been before his ascension to
the throne.
An emperor's entries and receptions were extremely magnificent.
He appeared in the long garments of a high priest with a white
priestly band, which was decorated with pearls, on his head.
It was thought that the sovereigns possessed the incredible
strength of a glance. Therefore, it was categorically forbidden to
look them in the eyes. At the approach of a king, everyone was

298
supposed to' prostrate himself, while uttering magical formulas to
avert the power of the king's glance. And what is more, the strength
of a word was recognized as 'omni potent.
They consider this custom Oriental, but it flourished equally
in Europe.
The holy king was not supposed to touch the ground during
tri ps, therefore, they carried him in a palanquin or he rode on
horseback. We are able to see in many pictures which have been
preserved since those times the carriage of grand dukes or kings on
special litters. This custom existed from France to Tibet and
Burma. And in Japan, too. Faithful Japanese to this day do not
doubt in the divine origin of their emperor.
The law of the first wedding night, well·known in the whole
world, grew out of the institution of the holy kings. Not only did
the rulers themselves in those times treat it extremely seriously,
which is fully explainable, but also the newlyweds, regardless how
strange this sounds today. Homage to the phallus had done its
work. It would not be a joke if a child were conceived with the
partici pation of the divine phallus! One had to consider such a tot
divine. Moreover, the first-born would be the natural offspring of
the sovereign, which promised sizable material benefits.
Playwrights say that on the stage, the king himself does not
convey royal grandeur, but his entourage does. And it is the same
in life. The institution of the divine kings gave birth to such court
positions as chamberlains, house stewards, etc. OWing to the sacral
quality of the king's personage, the house steward, while serving the
meals, was supposed to test them at first, and afterwards, having
turned away from the king so that he did not sec how the latter
ate, ring a bell. All courtiers prostrated themselves at once: the
moment of partaking of food by the sovereign also was sacred.
The title of "purveyor to the Court of His Imperial Majesty"
was connected with the institution of the sacred kings. This title
was the most honorable in all the states independent of the empire -
from London to Tokyo. The Court purveyor was supposed to deliver
only the ritually pure - kosher - which was approved by the high
priests and clergymen! - food, clothing, etc., worthy of a sovereign.
The rulers had their own heraldic symbols. The question about
them is extremely important for studying the system of governing

299
an empire. Heraldry reflects the correlation of the central authority
with the authority of governors around the whole world, the dynastic,
hierarchal, military and other connections which made the owners
of some emblems powerful rulers and others - vassals.
The question becomes central here about the heraldic
significance of the African maned lion as a symbol of a central
royal authority. The maned lion lives only in the central part of
the African continent in the Savanna belt on the territory of Sudan.
By the way, the extent of its portrayal is unusually wide: it is
included in the emblems of Tibet, China, Burma. Sri-Lanka, the
southern provinces of India, Persia, Spain, England and Finland.
When and for whom the lion became a symbol of empire, one
may judge by the title of the emperors - of the Ethiopian Negus
Negussie (King of Kings): "The Lion of the Tribe of Judah was
victorious." That is, according to tradition, one of the 12 grandsons
of Abraham, the ancestor of the 12 tribes of Israel, Judah, first made
the Lion a symbol of royal authority. So the practice of that time
is reflected in the legend.
In the time of the king there was a senate. It consisted of
patres - the elders of the communities. Hence, their traditional
designation - "fathers and senators". Any decision was supposed
to receive their approval in order to become a law for the community.
The authority of the senators was called "paternal authority"
(auctoritas patrum.) The notion of "pope", which is fundamental
in the hierarchy of authority, was applied, as we see, to the nearest
associates of the king.
At the heart of the state laws lay the fas, a code of religious
maxims. The holy laws. thus, embodied that stage in the development
of the Jaw when it still had not been separated fully from the
religious institutions.
All this, in the opinion of traditional history, was in the mythical
Roman Empire. And the names of the different institutions of
authOrity and codes of laws arc cited in the books on the history of
law in Latin. The Roman supposedly spoke it. At the same time, the
authors refer to works which became known only in the Middle
Ages, when written publications appeared for the first time in Latin.
Disputes regarding the antiquity of Latin have not faded away
over the centuries. It is considered that "ancient. shining Latin"

300
lost all its dignity by the start of the Middle Ages and was changed
into a coarse, clumsy language which regained its former luster
again only in the Renaissance epoch. Such a degradation, and
then resurrection, one need say, is a fantastic phenomenon. Not
one language of the world has completed similar f1i p-f1ops in its
development. This by itself elicits critical curiosity.
But we will not enter into the dispute. For detennination of the
age of "ancient" works it is by far more productive to turn to their
content. That is, to use the same method used by many researchers in
the analysis of the holy books. When this is done it becomes clear
that the "ancient" sources, as a matter of fact, were written in the
Middle Ages. We will make certain of this a bit later, while examining
the legacy of Plato and Aristotle, the best known of the "ancient"
philosophers and theorists of law and the state system.
For the time being we shall emphasize that there is an inviolable
1<iw of social life. This is that people judge one problem or another
only ·when these problems appear. There is not one case in the
history of mankind when someone in good time, particularly over
many centuries, discussed and analyzed problems which had not
appeared yet. Nature still has not created such prophets. Therefore,
it is possible to calculate the time of a work's creation by its content.
We have in mind here accounts which discuss different forms of
state system and their pre-history and development trends.
In particular, when states began to attain those shapes which
are familiar to us today, questions were raised by those whom we
call (by convention) Plato and Aristotle: how are proper states
constituted'? On which principles and laws? And this is the Middle
Ages! They relegated those princi pies which they formulated to
antiquity in order to convince everyone of their truth and age.
Such was the social control of society.
If one puts aside the Scaligeriall chronology he can see in the
sources how people came to gri ps,step-by-step, with the fundamentals
of state structure in their new historical conditions. Everything in
life occurred exactly as it was described in the "ancient" works
(proVided, that is, that one considers the Middle Ages "antiquity").
Thus, at the base was the fas, the code of the religious maxims.
The priests were involved with this; in particular, the college of
pontiffs. The etymology of the word pontifices is "bridge builders".

301
It is a question of a bridge between the world of people and the
world of the gods. The pontiffs managed the calendar, legal
procedure and private law.
This college was considered most powerful owing to the fact
that its constituent members were connected with the totality of
the gods. L1.ter, when the forced introduction of monotheism began,
they began to represent the one God. Still later, in the time of the
flowering of the Christianity of Jesus Christ, of all the pontiffs
there remained only one - the Pope of Rome. And no one
remembered any longer that with which its pagan predecessors
had been involved.
Having adapted fas to life, the priests created ius - secular law,
which appeared in the form of royal laws - leges regiae, and at its
heart - tradition. This was promulgated by them as having been
the customs of the forefathers - the traditions of the elders (mores
maiorum).
On the whole, a situation was depicted which was identical
to "ancient" Egypt. Only it is strange that there is not one line
about it in one work about legendary Rome. But you see, the
paralle,ls are simply striking. They give one with a basis to suppose
that it is a question about one and the same society. Only they
called it otherwise and sent it off into different epochs.
The content of the royal laws is unknown with any precision,
as the traditional history recognizes. But it nevertheless knows
that crimes - misdeeds - already were being divided into those
which affected all of society (delicta publica) and those which
affected individual persons (delicta privata.) The original ius,
very likely, specialized in "public matters". Duoviri perduelliones
investigated the matters of crimes against society, murders included.
Death as a dedication to the gods in the sacrifice of people, which
was declared sacer esto, was the punishment for such crimes.
Private cases also were subject to sacral law and customs.
They burnt arsonists, for example, for deliberate arson. In other
words, the Judaic law, "an eye for an eye," was operative.
Every border - terminus - was under the protection of a god.
This was, when it appeared, an innovation which sprang from the
ideas of private property and the state. The Latin expression
"capital punishment", poena capite, literally "punishment by the

302
head" ("cutting off of the head") in a figurative sense designated
"reduction to slavery". The enslavement of military prisoners was,
in civil terms, the equivalent of their death. Therefore, the word
servus, which means slave, had the meaning "retained," that is, one
who could have been killed, but whose life was. The slave had
died in the eyes of the law. From this followed the legal axiom
"the slave has no head" (servus nullum caput habuit).
Such, in our view, were features of the law in the first decade of
the existence of the empire. However, new princi pies of law were
necessary for a state based on a single god and his anointed which
replaced the old one, with its numerous intermediaries between the
emperor and SOCiety, the "father senators" and the pontiffs, each of
whom prayed to his own god and guessed according to the liver of
a sacrificed animal what might happen tomorrow.
At just this very time appeared, out of nowhere, the works of
Plato and Aristotle, concerned, as these were, with the fundamental
princi pies of building a state.
One should recall here what we have already said concerning
Plato io previous chapters. History has preserved accounts of
PIeton, who lived in the Middle Ages and who, himself, wrote the
works later attributed to "ancient" Plato. His works bear the same
titles as those of his "ancient" namesake. He even organized an
Academy, exactly as did Plato. That is, supposedly, he duplicated
the career of his famous predecessor down to the last detail.
Practically all serious researchers now recognize the mythic
quality of Plato, whatever the chronology to which they adhere.
Traditional historians, true, speak about it somewhat allegorically,
acknowledging, for example, that the Sparta which Plato describes
in his "Republic" was mythical:
"The myth exercised an influence on Plato's political theory
and on the theory of countless subsequent writers. In its developed
form, it is contained in the 'Biography of Lykurgos', which belongs
to Plutarch. The ideals which this myth supported played a
significant role in the development of the theories of Russo, Nietzsche
and national socialism. From the historic point of view, this myth
is even more important than the reality".
The priority of the myth over reality is a curious
acknowledgement for historians. Even more significant is Plato's

303
connection with national socialism, one of the most terrible
phenomena of the 20th century.
But just what did Plato write? How docs he propose to build
a state?
He begins with a division of citizens into three classes: the
common people, soldiers and guardians.
..."Justice will be admittcd to be the having and doing of what
is a man's own, and belongs to him. Seeing then that there are three
distinct classes, any meddling of one with another, or the change of
one into another, is the greatest harm to the State, and may be most
justly termed evil~doing. " ("The Republic," Book 4).
And another thi.ng: ... "at the foundation of the State, a man
should practice one thing only, the thing to which his nature was
best adapted (ibid).
In other words, everyone should know his place. Political
power is to be entrusted only to the guardians. There are
significantly fewer of these than there arc of the people who belong
to the first two classes. The main problem, in Plato's opinion, is
assuring that the guardians carry out the command of the legislator.
... "Do not compel us to assign to the guardians a sort of
happiness which will make them anything but guardians" (ioid).
They arc an isolated class. So isolated that Plato proposes
establishing for them a special way of life. They arc obliged to
live in small homes and eat simple food; at lhat, in common dining
rooms; they have no private property besides what is absolutely
necessary. Gold and silver are forbidden to them.
If it is scrutinized a bit more closely, then Plato's program is,
per se, a shorl summary of monastic communes. Their members are
even called by the same name that the medieval monks (the adherents
of monotheism) called themselves - guardians! Where is the
antiquity here?
True, the Platonic guardians, in contrast to monks, can have
children. But their children will be taken away from their parents
after birth and serious measures taken to ensure that the parents
don't kJl0W which children are theirs and the children do not
know who their parents are. The parties involved have no right
to object to the "marriages" arranged by the state. They are
supposed to be guided by the thought of their debt to the State,

304
and not by any kind of sentiment.
"All these women should be common to all these men, not one
should live honestly with the other" (ibid).
Plato's thoughts about how it is necessary to govern people
are interesting. Best of all is to govern with the aid of a lie! At
that, the lie is supposed to be the exclusive right of the government,
exactly the same as the right to prescribe medicine is the exclusive
right of the physician. It is supposed to be "one royal lie". The
doctrine that God created people of three sorts is the most important
part of it: the best are made of gold, those a bit worse - from silver,
and the common people - from copper and iron.
Those made from gold are fit to be the guardians, those from
silver are supposed to be the warriors and the rest may be involved
with physical labor. Thjs is, of course, a lie, but Plato thinks that
it is possible to reaf new generations in such a way that they
cannot bring themselves to doubt it.
In the ideal state, social inequality is a means of supporting
stability, but by no means of receiving the advantages of the upper
layers. The benefiCiary of freedom and supreme perfection turns
out, with Plato, not to be the individual or even a c1as..'\, but all of
society itself:
..."OUf aim in founding the State was not the disproportionate
happiness of any aile class, but the greatest happiness of the whole"
("The Republic". Book. 4).
In Aristotle's opinion, Plato is not right because the real Sparta
is not at all as the author of "The Republic" described it. The
Spartans show themselves to be both cowards, and as liars; one is
casily able to bribe them ... Aristotle decidedly did not like Sparta.
But before speaking about his views, a few words about whether
as a matter of fact there once was such a philosopher. His most
ancient biography is dated only to the 14th century. Historians,
as in the case with Plato, are compelled to maintain that his
philosophy was forgotten without a trace by mankind for fifteen
hundred years, only to be miraculously reborn in all its brilliance
in the Middle Ages. At the same time, they themselves are at a loss
as to how this was able to happen.
We shall quote the opinion of the famous scientist, Bertrand
Russell, which is stated in the fundamental "The History of Western

305
Philosophy". The fallowing puzzles him: a gap of centuries lies
between the philosopher's works and the Middle Ages when his
works became known. And for some reason "nothing to which
these experiments were relevant existed from Aristotle's time until
the rise of the Italian cities in the Middle Ages. In many ways, the
experience to which Aristotle appeals is more relevant to the modern
world than to any that cxisted for fifteen hundred years after the
book was written" ("The History of Western Philosophy").
Speaking morc simply, Aristotle's works supposedly appeared
fifteen hundred years before the need for them arose. Really, an
inexplicable paradox.
There are also other grounds for doubt. We know practically
everything about Aristotle: who his father was, where and from whom
he studied, the names of those he educated (Alexander the' Great
himself among them!) and when and from what he died· "from an
old stomach disease". And all this is known after the philosopher's
two thousand years of complete oblivion! Where are the originals of
the documents in which such detailed information is contained?
Who kept them for so many centuries? For comparispn: our
information about Shakespeare, who lived four hundred years ago, is
contradictory and fragmentary. Authorities on Shakespeare have
thoroughly studied every surviving scap of documentation from the
Shakespearian epoch. Which independent documents have been
preserved since the time of "ancient" Aristotle? None.
But let us see that which he pondered. In contrast to Plato,
Aristotle was convinced:
"The state is created... for living happily."
True, people are not the same, and therefore their ideas of
happiness are different:
All tame animals are better off when they are ruled by man;
the one rules and the other is ruled; this principle, of necessity,
extends to all mankind".
The part devoted to tyranny is intereSting. A tyrant desires
riches, whereas a king desires honors. The tyrant has guards who
are mercenaries, whereas the king has guards who are citizens.
Tyrants are mostly demagogues, who acquire power by promising
to protect the people against the notables. He should make war, in
order that his subjects may have something to do and be always in

306
want of a leader ("Politics").
"It is a melancholy reflection that this passage is, of the whole
book, the onc most appropriate to the present day," Bertrand Russell
notes. One can agree with him. Really, the impression is created
that Aristotle lived quite recently.
This impression is strengthened when you read Aristotle's
discussion of ~ow foreign conquest still does not mean the end of
the state. Bertrand Russell sees signs in it that in deep antiquity
"many people took the imperialist view" - a somewhat unexpected
conclusion. Imperialism is a phenomenon of completely other times,
by no means ancient. And even discussion of foreign conquest is
feasible only when nations appear that one can conquer. But if onc
is to believe Aristotle, there were only city·states in his times!
Could these have been considered separate nations? Or foreigners
in relation to one another? Of course not.
Aristotle's city-states are, in our opinion, an exact image of
mediaeval Italy, where no one spoke yet about an Italian nation.
The Italians became aware of themselves as a single nation only in
Garibaldi's time. So just when did Aristotle live?
He also meditates on how large the state should be. It is supposed
to be sufficiently large to accomplish the satisfaction of personal needs
to some degree, but not so large that it cannot be effectually governed.
This, in our view, is direct, concrete advice to rulers on problems of
state structure - not abstract theorizing. And, as we shall see later,
Aristotle's opinions were the basis on which both an actual empire
and the states which originated in its ruins were built.
The philosopher's opinion about classes is interesting.
Men who work for their living should not be admitted to
citizenshi p. "Citizens should not lead the life of mechanics or
tradesmen, for such a life is ignoble and inimical to virtue". And
the philosopher expresses himself as rcgards trade, usury and money:
... "The most hated sort, and with the greatest reason, is usury,
which makes a gain out of money itself, and not from the natural
object of it. For money was intended to be used in exchange, but
not to increase at interest... Wherefore, of all modes of getting
wealth, this is the most unnatural". ("Politics" Book t, 23).
As we will show in the chapter "Money for the Empire", all
these attributes of economics appeared only when an economic

307
surplus appeared in society, when the manufacturing technology
for minting coins was developed, when a banking system and
rates of exchange of different states had Come into being, and
when a system of communications connected gigantic spaces,
without which there is no trade. Civilized events, colossal in
their results, had to occur before trade and money became an integral
part of people's lives. There were none of these events in "antiquity."
They occurred in the Middle Ages.
Several words about usury. It, as Aristotle himself says, is built
on the interest received by the money-lender. The author clearly
does not know that in antiquity the mathematical notion "interest",
which he uses freely, did not exist. He is certain that there had
always been usury-interest and that any reader would undj::rstand
what he meant without any explanation of it being necessary.
Aristotle in general is a profound modern economist. He
researched such phenomena totally as the division of labor,
commodity economy, the two types of cost, allocation, etc. He also
guessed that a monetary form of trade is the furthest development
of a simple form of cost, that mOlley functions both as a measure of
cost and as a means of currency. "His insigbts are surprising", the
historians write admiringly. The economist Karl Marx even calls
Aristotle a great researcher, who analyzed for the first time the
form of cost. (Marx Karl, Engels Frederick. Collected Works
2nd edition, volume 23, page 68).
It is all correct, Aristotle is rcally great. But could there have
been a commodity economy in "ancient" time? The minimum demand
of Aristotle's "Politics" is that all citizens should possess the ability
to submit. The maximum program applies only to the rulers: not
only is the virtue of a citizen necessary for the ability to rule, but
also the virtue of a man, because the authority he has should be
morally perfect. A political structure assumes the authority of law,
which is defined by the philosopher as "a dispassionate intellect",
and as "those foundations according to which those in power are
supposed to rule and defend a given form of state existence against
those who disrupt it". (VI, 1, page 217).
As a law-abiding and loyal citizen, Aristotle thinks: a monarchy
is the most ancient form of political structure, the first and most
godlike form, especially an absolute monarchy, which is achieved

308
with the presence in the state of a most splendid man. Aristotle
maintains that such a man is as if he were elevated to (l position
above the law. Being in effect a god among ordinary people, he
himself is the law and it is ridiculous to try to subject him to the
laws he makes for others. "Such people in the states are their
eternal kings" (III, 8, page 131). If such a man is found in the
state, then "it remains only to submit to such a man".
Let us look at how the advice of Plato and Aristotle is
considered in the state organization. Yes, a monarch, the "eternal
king", stands above the law. The King can do no wrong. Here we
see full agreement with Aristotle.
Society is divided, according to Plato, into classes; the guardians
teach these to submit. But one has to govern according to some kind
of rules, otherwise the country collapses ~ especially since it is larger
than the city-states were, by orders of magnitude. How is it to be?
Above all: find deputies locally. Here one cannot afford to
make a mistake. Practically everything depends on the one who
exercises rule-by-proxy - most of all tranquility in the conquered
territories. Of course, it wasn't any great difficulty to name as a
ruler a local prince, a doge or, at worst, the leader of a tribe. But how
loyal would th~ be? Might they raise an insurrection tomorrow,
trying to separate from the empire? This is what troubled the capital.
But if the sovereign was anointed to the kingdom, then his
main proteges in the locations should in some way be connected
with the Lord or the prophets. The more firmly it was suggested
to people that the authority was from God, the less trouble there
would be from them. They wouldn't revolt even in their thoughts.
Therefore, those who belonged to the caste of monotheists were
valued by the rulers and were counted as the emperor's kinsmen.
Attachment to family life and nepotism in the allocation of
authority were an ineradicable feature of all states of the world.
Even now they flourish in the developing countries.
Instructions concerning the selection and allocation of
personnel are scattered in the writings of a later period, when the
monotheist Jews had yielded their public role in the arena of
history to the foltowers of the New Testament. But while the
ideological paradigm had changed, the princi pies, which had been
proven in practice many times by the predecessors, were maintained

309
and multiplied. It is through these that we also judge the empire's
state structure.
The facts cited in the book by Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh,
and Henry Lincoln are typical in this regard ("The Holy Blood
and the Holy Grail"). They examine, in this, the holy family and
the inheritance of royal authority in the leading crowned houses
of Europe. Very curious things come to light. It turns out, for one
thing, that the rulers of the Middle Ages, the forefathers of many
modern royal courts, traced their own dynasties to the family tree
of Jesus Christ! To that same Son of God who, according to the
Bible, had neither family nor children.
That Christ had traditionally been unmarried did not suit
the rulers who, only recently, after the collapse of the empire, had
seized power and whose fathers and grandfathers were Jews. It
was necessary to find· and quickly - other, more noteworthy
branches in their family trees. Thus the. notion became generally
accepted and even obligatory in those times that Jesus Christ had
a wife, children and other relatives and relations.
The recent writing of a certain historian, who found a relational
connection of Great Britain's royal family with Christ, is recalled.
As the press reported, the author was rewarded with the praise of this
family's members. So, the medieval propensity of the crown-bearing
personalities for a more esteemed pedigree is alive to this day.
The authors of "Holy Blood" ... are advancing a version of the
origin of the Merovingians from the tribe of Benjamin. Jean Robin,
the French historian, calls this version "the bodily carnal Judaization
of the Merovingians".
It is contended that Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene,
who belonged to the family of Benjamin, and that he had an heir
to the throne from her. In the well-known "Golden Legend\
Jacobus de Voragine maintains that Mary Magdalene-was of a royal
family. This sounds especially strange if one recalls that, in New
Testament tradition, she figures as a woman of ill repute.
Mary's father bore the Persian name Syrus, and her mother the
Greek Eucharia, which points to her haVing been not simply
royal, but of imperial origin. Moreover, Jacobus de Voragine, in
concert with even earlier Christian authors, identifies Saint Mary
Magdalene as the Mary of Bethany in the Gospel of John.

310
 According to the "Golden Legend," both sisters, their brother
(Lazarus), Joseph of Arimathea, the Lord's brother James and Saint
Maximinus sailed on a shi p to Marseilles. The Russian chronicles
mention the coming of Mary Magdalene from the Promised Land,
her visit to Tiberius in Rome and the presentation to him of gifts.
A most interesting subject, which has precious little in common
with the canonical Gospels.
After the death of Magdalene, James, the Lord's brother,
founded the "Brotherhood of the Knights of the Holy Sepulchre",
and the last relatives of Jesus Christ from the Holy Family, escorted
by the Grand Master (Maximum) of the Sepulchres (Keepers of
the Grave), sailed to Europc.
There they continllcd to guard the grave. And not just
anywhere, but in Provence, in thc small town of Acqs, in the Sainte
Baume grotto, which means "Holy Healing".
At first all the highest ranks of the caste of stewards was
considered the same family. Relations among them were conducted
according to a formula which was stated by Rudyard Ki piing in
the "Jungle Book" - "Mowgli": "You and I are of the same blood"
(even though this may have been the spiritual, ideological, and
religious blood which is frequently stronger than real family ties).
Later, of course, this formula was abstracted away into "Brothers
and Sisters in Christ" • cocering absolutely everybody who believed.
Therefore, the comparatively recently uncovered frescoes of
the Archangclsk and Blagoveshchensk cathedrals in the Moscow
Kremlin should be interpreted with absolute dispassion. 1n the
time of the Romanov tsars they were covered with plaster and
partially broken. And when they uncovered them, they saw that
Christ's family tree was portrayed on the frescoes. And the Russian
grand dukes Dmitri Donskoi, Vasily Dmitrievich, Ivan the Third
and Vasily the Third were included in it. Alongside them stand
the "ancient" philosophers and poet,; Plato, Plutarch, Aristotle, Virgil,
Zeno, Thucydides, Homer and others. They are all from the same
epoch and the same tribal family: from the caste of the medieval
monotheists. Before the Romanovs they still knew that the family
tree of the ruling castes was oncc a real famHy tree.
The continuous connections of the local rulers with the Judaic
center of the empire are clearly traced in Asia as well. The family

311
tree of the Afghan royal family is typical in this regard; this is
cited in the book by the Japanese writer Arimasa Kubo, "The
Israelites Came to Ancient Japan".
According to the legcnd, the rulers of Afghanistan are the
descendants of the ancient Israelites from the tribe of Benjamin.
It is extremely revealing that this assertion was expressed only in
the 17th century. That is, after the break-up of the empire and the
birth of Islam.
The adherents of this version maintain that King Shaul (Saul)
had a son Yirmiahu (Jeremiah), who also had a son named
Afghana. Jeremiah died approximately at the same time as his
father, Shaul; Afghana secured a high position in the rule of King
David and remained at the royal court during the rule of Solomon.
Four hundred years later, during the'troubles in Israel, the
Afghana family resettled in the province of Gur (now the center of
Afghanistan,) They stayed here to live and went into trade. With
the arrival of Islam on these lands, seven representatives of the
Jews who lived in Gur, headed by their leader Kish, appealed to
the prophet Mohammed. The prophet rewarded them, and the
Jewish name Kish was changed by Mohammed to the name Arab-
a-Rashid. Afterwards, Arab-a-Rashid received instructions to
spread Islam among his people.
The legend bears, as we see, a strikingly pronounced religious
character. It has been called upon to show the all-triumphant
strength of Islam, Indeed, it was worth having Mohammed's lesson
in sight, as the Jews immediately understood where the truth lay
and bowed to the prophet. If onc does not take into account the
religious slant, then before us is a truthful tale about how during
the collapse of the empire, which was called the troubles in Israel, a
group of Israelites ran off to the former imperial province of Gur.
Here they settled down, supported by the former governor-general
of the center - Kish, and being an educated and experienced
people, having money and connections, became the actual rulers.
Inasmuch as over time it became clear that the empire would not be
restored and the religion which had predominated in it would
not recover its lost positions, it was necessary to look for another
ideological prop and distance itself from Judaism, And then they
decided to lean upon the just-born Islam, Mohammed gladly

312
agreed to support them. There are grounds to suppose that in
particular such successes became the motivation behind the
appearance in the Koran of the Surahs supporting the ambition of
the Jews to return to their own lands.
True, afterwards it was necessary to replace mercy with anger.
The local population, which hated the newcomer tax collectors,
was not agreed to recognize anything at all that came from them.
Therefore, otber surahs arose, just as God-inspired, which called
for the destruction of the Jews - pronto and without mercy.
They knew well as early as the 18th century that the rulers of
the various states which had been formed on the ruins of the
empire belonged to the same caste. During the Great French
Revolution, a crowd attempted to destroy the statues of the 28
Israeli kings that adorned the cathedral of Notre Dame de Paris.
The statues were located high up and it was difficult to hit them,
but they destroyed them soundly. Traditional history notably
fails to explain why the revolutionaries did not like the Biblical
kings. There is only the supposition that any mention of rulers
and kings at all would make the people furious. So they tried to
reach these statues.
If one even agrees that revolutionary elements arouse in people
by no means the best feelings, the artificiality of similar explanations
is obvious. Most likely, the crowd in those times still fully perceived
Israel and the royal dynasty as a single whole. The 28 Israeli kings
represented to them the predecessors of the overthrown monarchy.
Let us return, however, to The Holy Blood and the Holy
Grail. .
The symbol of the gmil is a symbol of authority and of traditions,
which are inherited. It is part and parcel of the legendary Prester
John, the legend of whom was spread widely in the Middle Ages.
John was the master of a huge empire, he was omni potent and
all-powerful. Kings and tsars were for him only subjects. ''Tractatus
pulcherrimus" calls John "the king of kings· rex regnum." He combines
in himself spiritual and secular authority and he can say about himself:
"Prester John, by God's grace lord of all lords who only are beneath
heaven from the rising of the sun to paradise on C<1.rth".
In all the mediaeval sources, Prester John controls and holds
back the tribes of the Gogs and Magogs and controls the seen and

313
unseen worlds, He impedes the penetration into his kingdom of
"lions" and "giants", Imperial military units corresponded to the
"lions", which had portrayals of a lion on their ensigns (standards),
"The degraded caste of warriors who had renounced high princi pies
and fell into the gri p of arrogance, violence and militancy
corresponded to the "giants" or "titans". "The giants, according to
the epic literature of those times, were worshi ppers of the wolf"
(Yaroslav Kesler).
Some sources maintain that king Xerxes, Alexander the Great,
the Roman emperors, Ogier, king of Denmark and many. others
visited the kingdom of Prester John and there they were accorded
legitimatization of their status as rulers.
John's kingdom is named the empire of the "Great Khan" in
mysterious and miraculous stories, that is, the Khan Father, in
Slavic BATl-KHAN or Vatikan, who sits in the center of the world.
According to the deseri ptioos of Marco Polo, Haytoo, Mandeville,
Giovanni di Plano Carpinia and others, he was understood as the
all-powerful sovereign of a huge country, as a wise and happy
monarch, Which fully corresponds to our version.
The main conclusion is: "The idea of the grail is the idea of
imperial power",
And on it, let us repeat, a vertical system of governance has
been built. The armed forces were its most important component.
For all around, you know, arc conqucred territories with a hostile
population! On the other hand, to hold troops there permanently
meant to destroy the state.
And then a llew form of military presence arose. More precisely,
an old form of monastic communes, which arose as integrations of the
castrated, was fitted to the new conditions. They founded military
units on the conquered lands which were based on the princi pIes of a
fraternal (monastic) community. Communities of guardians.
The opinion prevails that monastic communities were not typical
of Judaism. It is not in the least so. One would like to emphasize
again: the Judaism of that time was not a matter of religion or of
national isolation. It was a caste, an original social stratum of society.
The Jewish writer Philo of Alexandria in the composition "A
Contemplative Life" described the Egyptian "therapeutists"
(literally "attendants"). The rules of their life were so close to the

314
later monasticism that Euscbius Pamphili (supposedly the fifth
century A,D') wrote in his "Church History", that Philo was talking
about the first Christian monks.
In 1947, specialists, as we already have said, found a village of
the monastic type at the famous Qumran, That same Qumran where
the world-renowned scrolls supposedly two thousand years old
were discovered, The regulations of this settlement had very much
in common with the Egyptian "therapeutists" described by Philo,
and also with those mentioned by various bistorians under the
term "Essenes".
Therefore, before the very middle of 1960, voices were heard
which proposed considering Qumran a Christian settlement or at
least "proto-Christian", The opinion changed fundamentally
afterwards. The Qumran scrolls led to a radical change in current
notions concerning both the historical side of the development of
the forms of fraternal societies and about the conceptual content
of this form.
Qumran was not Christian in tbe modern understanding of
this word, and it was not a direct predecessor of Christianity. We
can say at the same time that it was also not an alternative to
Christianity. The forms of the monastic life (ascetic ideals and
even everyday life itself) were put together as form of caste life
which served the empire. They were, by the highest standards, if
one does not take into account the religious appearance, imperial,
That is, they fulfilled the role not only of religious centers, but
also of special foundations of authority. And one can call them
Christian only in the case of knowing that Christianity existed at
that time without Christ.
As the researcher of the history of the monastic communes
and orders, A. Sinelnikov, emphasizes, while speaking about the
origin of 'the monastic communes, that we should grasp two ideas
- a chaste existence and an existence which is isolated from people.
Both have ancient pre-Christian roots, which go back to the time
of castration. Nonetheless, all forms of Christian mOfi<\sticism have
been built on them and are being built to this day,
According to Bibl ical sources, the appearance of the monks
occurred after the gift of the New Testament, and they were foretold
by the prophet Jeremiah (Book of Jeremiah 31: 31 33,) And this
4

315
idea is encountered in it for the first time in the Bible. The
commune, or the Church of the New Testament, is similar to Israel,
which wanders in the desert. This is a military camp, and those,
who are in it are in a military situation.
The soldiers are not supposed to be burdened either by property
or by family - we know how literally the early Church transferred
this requirement to itself. Moreover, even in peacetime they keep
permanent guard. The consciousness of the Church as a war "camp"
in the desert implied the isolatipn of its members from common
people, and even more - a relationshi p to those who are outside the
camp, as to a potential enemy. Israel (those who rise up against
God) did not desire war, but still less found friendship with those
peoples through whose domains it went, as through a desert.
Everything was organized precisely as Plato had prescribed.
The requirement for release from the family inexorably led to
the ideal of a chaste life, which was necessary for a permanent
paschal vigil, or guard. What kind family can there be when onc
must be permanently on the alert, like a sentry at the post! Angels,
also keeping watch for the Lord, have neither families nor relatives.
And it is necessary for the "divine dogs" to become like them,
sinless creations of the Lord.
This idea is expressed in divine service not only by the Christian,
but also by the inhabitants of Qumran. When they sing today in
the churches Now the forces of Heaven serve invisibly with us,
they arc repeating the main thought of pre-Christian divine service
(Yaroslav Kesler).
Therefore, the Question is not in which of the religions there
exists monasticism, but the main difference between its various
forms. It, this difference, is distinguished by the idea of "asceticism",
a heritage of the times of the castrati.
The ascetic way of life has become the foundation of the existence
of new brotherhoods. The studies of the holy fathers, who lived at
one time with the first monks and represented the two most important
regions of the world· Syria (Jacob Aphraat) and Asia Minor
(Methodius of Olympus) are evidence of it Aphraat and Methodius
define the general church foundation on which the empire erected the
building of monasticism as a special imperial institution.
Teaching about the Church as a military camp in Exodus

316
becomes primary with Saint Methodius.
The idea itself of the Exodus implies "a pilgrimage." It is one
of the main definitions of monasticism. "A monk is a pilgrim, he is
not supposed to interfere in a strange land - and then he will be
comforted". Even in later times the monastic tradition continues
to trace its pilgrimage to Abraham. The classical treatise on
"pilgrimage" is the third stage of the Ladder of Saint John Climacus
(supposedly of the 7th century). There, in particular, it says:
"No one to such a measure has subjected himself to a pilgrimage
as that Great One who heard: leave your land, and your family, and
the home of your father, and furthermore was summoned to a foreign
and barbaric land. Sometimes the Lord much glorifies the one
who will be made a pilgrim in the example of his Great One"...
The prophet Isa.iah adds:
"But they who wait for the Lord will renew their strength,
they shall mount up wiLh wings like eagles, they shall run and not
be weary, they shall walk and not faint." (Isaiah 40:31.)
And another thing: "He will raise a signal for a nation afar
off, and whistle for it from the ends of the earth; and 10, SWiftly,
speedily it comesl None is weary, none stumbles, none slumbers or
sleeps, not a waistcloth is loose, not a sandal-thong broken; their
arrows arc sharp, all their bows bent, their horses' hoofs seem like
flint, and their wheels like the whirlwind" (Isaiah 5:26-28).
"God's people" with the name of the Lord on the Ii ps and
with bows in hand walk in the vanguard of the Exodus· in the
struggle for dominion in the world.
Enough is well known about some facets of life of the military
camp - of the monasteries. In particular, about the principles of
obedience and unselfishness. We will dwell on the less known.
Even days of repose in the brotherhoods are looked on as a
repetition of the stages of the Exodus. As Israel (those against
God) h<ls rested in its wandering along with the tabernacles of
the covenant each Sabbath, so too the Church rests in its own
celebrations of the "true Sabbath" - Sunday, and afterwards will
push further until it completes the conquest of the ncw lands.
Onc more eloquent detail. During a march in enemy territory
it is deathly dangerous to start a friendshi p with the local
inhabitants. Therefore, the monastery is supposed to have as few

317
contacts as possible with those who are outside the camp. And it is
even necessary to be fed extremely frugally and it is desirable
with those products which the monks themselves grow. The hostile
population is surprising, and it can poison.
Very likely everyone by no means knows that within the
monasteries the princi pie of absolute equality rules and that as
long as a century ago a prohibition was established against
accepting clerics into the brotherhood. Whoever you might be in
the world, for example a bishop, you will not get in.to the monastery
until you abdicate your dignity. Not one of the abbots has an
official church title which elevates him above the others. This
meant that everyone equally is responsible for fulfilling the covenant
for the conquest of new lands· of the fact that in the holy writing
it is called Jerusalem and we call Empire.
The "divine dogs" have become a buttress in the spread of
monotheism in the conquered regions and a reliable shelter for
those who procured money for the empire.
HiStory has preserved reports also about otiler facets of the state
organi7..ation of that period. A con federative structure of the Empire is
traced. It has caused not in the least an aspiration of the center to
give some kind of laws to the provinces. They began to think about
laws many centuries later. The fact was decisive that today political
scientists identify "feedback" and consider the successful functioning
of state apparatus one of the main conditions. Speaking simplistically,
the center is supposed to track permanently how the laws are fulfilled
at the local level and how the population regards these laws. Without
monitoring, efficient government is impossible.
However, in the Middle Ages there was nothing to think of
regarding the efficiency of remote areas: there were neither
communications nor a quick connection. So the best way out of
the situation was the creation of more or less autonomous provinces.
It was much easier and more convenient to control the local rulers
than the vast lands which were peopled by a population disposed
to hostil ity.
Main provinces were defined: Italy with Apulia and Sicily,
Castile and Portugal, Aragon with Catalonia and Navarre, England
with Scotland and Ireland, Germany with Livonia and Prussia,
Francc and Denmark. Its own leadershi p was in each province,
with troops and the attributes of authority. Each even had its

318
own Zemsky Sobor . a legislative organ.
In the pagan epoch, agreements between overlords and vassals
bore a sacral nature: the vassals vowed fidelity, calling on the gods as
witnesses. In the new conditions, the supreme ruler concluded pacts
with the governors. The Athenian Chalkokondyles (15th century)
reports about the resumption of a peace treaty between Byzantium
and the Osman state aftcr the assent to the throne of Bayazit I.
The governors themselves also concluded pacts with their
vassals.
One of the most well-known documents of the Middle Ages
which regulated the relationshi ps of the vassals with the overlord
is the Magna Carta of 1215 (according to the traditional chronology.)
The king notcd in the introduction that he is giving the liberties
"having regard to God and for the salvation of our soul".
There is one peculiarity in this assertion: John Lackland does
not say a word about Jesus Christ. He remembers God and the
holy church, but he docs not know the Son of God. It is like the
king was not completely Christian in the modern understanding of
this word. Otherwise, it is impossible to explain such "forgetfulness".
Without fail, a provincial spiritual center was created which
guided the overall religious and ideological line of the central
authority. The rulers understood clearly already at that time: the
more soundly the ideas necessa.ry for the capital are introduced into
the people's minds, the less trouble the conquered tribes will give,
The division of the powers left their traces not only in the
documents, but also in the language of the different peoples. The
linguist Emile Bencvistc discovered in the ancient Indian and
ancicnt Iranian languages clear indications of the existence in
ancicnt society of the following original castes:
,... . ..... ,
" • -- .India
..
~ a person invested with military
qattnya jauthority
' . ,
- s_

~
ftA , •

~~rTior;
• !

"one 'Nho stands in a

,
+)

ra a8t! riot".

B a priest, the performer of holy Bl,priest

brahm6n al'ld religious ceremonies

a man who belongs viH. family,

l'iGravan

"he who is involved with

I
vllstryo
vaisya "a man from a nation' pasturage", "he who lends
auyant
cattle",

319
 Plato, as we see, used in his speculative creations the
accumulation of the former centuries.
Centers for the administration of medical and quarantine
operations appeared. The capital had people in locations who were
responsible for federal projects of construction, communications,
the development of crafts, the organi7..ation of land use and the
developing of land, and also units for the support of order and the
provision of internal security of the governing structures.
We are using modern ideas while speaking of these. Therefore,
the impression may appear that, at that time, the administration of
building and architectural affairs, sanitary control, police 'and the
like already existed. It is clear that there was none of this.
However, the problems which had appeared forced people to create
the rudiments of government - of countries, of regions and of
cities. Generally speaking, all of today's social and state structures
are, in their origin, survivals from the Middle Ages.

320
MONEY
FOR THE EMPIRE CHAPTER SIXTEEN

The traditional historiography is inclined to guess that empires

originated in antiquity periodically and abruptly. A military genius
appeared out of the blue in one state or the other who wished at
any cost to become famous for his exploits on the field of battle.
He assembled the troops, utterly destroying his own subjects, and
departed to sack and loot his neighbors near and far. His wars
were brave; weapons, the most modern ; strategy above praise.
I

Thus was an empire formed. And when the genius died, the state
there and then collapsed; the ungifted heirs plundered and reduced
it to pieces.
Such is a typical scheme of the birth and death of the ancient
empires which arc described in historic works. And allusions to
the material and financial basis of the campaigns, how they governed
the conquered territories and how they collected tribute from the
vanquished are encountered extremely rarely on the pages of the
traditional textbooks.
If descri ptions of this appear nevertheless, they are fantastic.
When a historian writes, for example, that some kind of "ancient"
conqueror brought, besides slaves, caravans with bags of gold coins
and chests of valuable stones, including diamonds from a far away
campaign, it means he did not have the slightest notion of what
significant civilized events were supposed to have taken place before
coins and diamonds appeared.
Stories about valuables brought from distant lands, in particular
about diamonds, look unfounded. At that, they are in a golden
setting and worthy of adorning the crowns of the ancient kings
and khans. That is, they are large and skillfully finished. Crowns
are not adorned with any old unpolished trinket.
Besides, specialists maintain that only diamond dust is able
to act on the hardest stones in the world. But did the technology
exist to get such dust and use it with the application of special

321
instruments and magnifying glasses in any "prehistoric" country?
There was no such country in antiquity. Diamond production is
an offspring of the Middle Ages. They were involved with them
most of all in Holland, one of the first commercial powers of the
world. Right there where they invented the first magnifying glasses!
One also must keep in mind that in the cutting of hard stones, it
is necessary to hold them to a wheel while observing a whole series
of conditions. It was possible to obtain the substance needed for this,
which is used successfully even today, only in the 15th century: it is
rosin, a residue of the distillation of natural resin. No one is in any
doubt today that distillation originated as a technological process
not earlier than the 15th century in connection with the appearance
of the tcchnology for the production of glass tubes.
The stories about coins look even less convincing. Numismatics
is evidence of it.
It reveals many peculiarities in the comparison of "ancient"
and mediaeval coins.
They perceive in their history, as also in history in general, "the
ancient golden age", "the dark ages" and the "Renaissance". It is
considered, for example, that gold coins practically disappeared
completely in Italy from the 8th century A.D. until the middle of
the 13th century. Western Europe supposedly rejected the
controversy with the Byzantines and the Moslems in the minting of
such coins. Even in Moslem Spain not one gold coin was struck
between the start of the 8th and the start of the 10th centuries.
Real "dark ages".
Inasmuch as it is impossible to accuse the "wild" nomads of it,
they have found another reason: they stopped stamping gold coins
on the demand of Pi pin at the council in Rheims. It turns out that
the Roman pope was able to change the economic laws! Didn't they
produce the most valuable currency for five hundred years in accordance
with his one decree? In our view, this explanation is intended only
for those who do not understand anything about economics.
Ferdinand Gregorovius notes in sorrow:
"No papal coins exist from the time of Beneclictus VII (died in
894) to Leo IX (middle of the 11th century; this is no more than
chance, since coins, of course, had to be minted ... It is even more
surprising that not one coin of Gregory VII has been preserved".
If it is chance then, in that case, its scales are broad. In the

322
hidden treasures of the 1O-13th centuries (for example, on the territory
of ancient Rus) among the tens of thousands of coins of that period,
only a few Italian coins of the 10·13th centuries have been found.
Inasmuch as no one intends to change the Scaligerian chronology,
historians have begun to assert that there were no Rus economic
and commercial ties with Italy then. But just what docs one do
then with the written sources that maintain that such ties, on the
other hand, were very strong? Traditional history is keeping quiet.
The "standstill" in Roman coinage from the 8th through the
13th centuries is especially striking after the shining (in the history
of coinage) period of the Roman Empire of the 1-6th centuries
A.D. In which connection, the "ancient" coins are distinguished
from the similar ones of the Middle Ages only by the fact that the
traditional chrollology relates them to the start of our era. There
are no other differences. There is a second: vague theories of
"simulations" and "imitations". For example, the English pennies
of King Edward (1042-1066) supposedly copy the Constantinople
solidi of Justinian II (565-578.) If they had been contemporaries,
it would be somehow understandable, but here the difference is
almost 500 years! And how were the mediaeval masters able fully
to reestablish the lost technology of coining after five centuries?
They were, the traditional history assures us. In 1252, broad
stamping of full weight gold coins which quickly replace those of
Byzantium, "reappears" in Rome completely unexpectedly and
"without preparation". This sudden event is considered in
traditional numismatics as a "dramatic change in the situations,
which prevailed in the first half of the Middle Ages".
Meanwhile, hiddcn trcasures have becn unearthed in which
mediaeval coins were intermixed with "ancient" ones. Is it possible
that over the five·century interruption of coining the ancient coins
kept their value (not wearing out) and that they continued to use
them here, there and everywhere? Unlikely. Most likely there
was no break as a matter of fact. As there was no "ancient" money.
In order to understand why, let us ask the question of how in
general money appeared in the modern understanding of this word.
And when.
No small amount of work (in particular, that of I. Shumach)
has been devoted to this question. Scientists have found the
follOWing:

323
 The appearance of money is a result of the development of
commercial and financial capital. And it developed only in the
cities. Not in imaginary fantastic cities of "antiquity", but in real
ones. "The first city settlements were, in the full sense of the word,
colonies of merchants and craftsmen, and the city foundations
arose among the arriving population, which were from all sides
alien to each other (Henri Pirenne "Belgium's Mediaeval Cities").
Cities as legal entities appeared for the first time in the
14th century.
"The city was strengthened by a vow of "commune" and
considered a "corporation" in a legal sense. By the way, all this
didn't happen at once, writes Max Weber in "City". "As early as
1313, as Hachek indicates, English cities were not able receive a
'franchise,' because they, speaking in the modern language, were
not a 'legal entity', and only during the time of Edward I do the
cities appear as corporations".
Well, and just who was a merchant? In the 14th century it
was, mainly, a seller of special, rare, luxurious and exotic goods. As
manufacturing developed and the elite grew rich, demand for such
goods grew. Therefore, in time the number and significance of the
businessmen grew. They introduced that small part of essential
surplus which the local economy was not able to produce. Let us
add that the local economy was mainly self·sufficient. It was
called a natural economy.
As Le Goff notes, "the majority of merchant associations, besides
the simple associations of a family type, were created only for one
dcal,a business trip or for a period from 3to 5 years. Only in the
14th century do the merchants bcgin to produce the first accounts.
Distrust toward an account will prevail longer still, and, as is
known, it is necessary to await the 14th century in order to see the
advent of real attention to a calculated quantity".
"One can consider precisely this absence of desire and ability
most strikingly of all it becomes apparent in the bookkeeping of
the Middle Ages," adds Werner Sam hart, "While looking through
the notes of some Toelner, Viko von Geldersen, Wittenborg, and
Otto Ruhland, you envision with difficulty that the authors were
the eminent merchants of their time. All their bookkeeping
consisted of disorderly entries of totals for purchases and sales,
which we meet, for example, in the minor shopkeepers of our small
provincial towns" ("Modern Capitalism"). Werner Sombart was

324
astonished for no reason. Toelner and his colleagues were minor
businessmen. Advanced bookkeeping isn't needed for one deal or
business tri p. It originated when the empire created the first
semblance of a unified state area. When more or less reliable trade
routes had appeared. When it became necessary to settle up using
money with near and distant business partners. When, finally,
different currencies were encountered in the markets. Just when
both bookkeeping and serious financial foundations of the banking
type became necessary. And they appeared.
By the way, the traditional history thinks that they were
conceived as early as in ancient Iran during the second millennium
before the new era. Afterwards "they blossomed richly ... in
Babylon", and Egypt. But in the fifth century A.D., as is believed
in the generally accepted chronology, the banks disappeared. It
can't be helped, the "dark ages"!
Historians Peter James and Nick Thorpe write as well:
"The banks disappeared in Europe after the destruction of the
empire in the 5th century of our era" ...
A developed banking network had appeared in the Arab world
by the 9th century". ("The Origin of Money and Banks"). The
historians do not specify in what way this network developed in
the East and why for five centuries there were no banks in Europe.
Having told the tale that loan agreements in Babylon were written
on clay tablets, and that they calculated percentages of profit with
the aid of pebbles, the authors transition to the early Middle Ages:
"The first European banking operations can be dated to 808
of our era, when Jewish merchants in Northern Italy united for
the creation of a primitive bank, in which it was possible to keep
cash on deposit. More or less modern banks appeared for the first
time in Venice at the end of the 12th century, when the great sea
power imposed on its citizens a special tax in order to pay expenses
for a war that was taking place Simultaneously with the East and
the West. A special commission, which at last was reformed into
the bank's management, kept an eye 011 the heaps (banck is "heap"
in German) of cash.
This is similar to the truth, but only similar. As the documents
testify, the first bank or "exchange table" was organized in the north
of Italy, in Genoa, in 1346. It had branches that were located in the
cities on the trade routes. Now the merchants were able to put
money into one of the branches,complete a trip without any money,

325
having thus lowered the risk of being robbed on the road, and at
another branch of the bank get their money back. One can imagine
what a relief this was for businessmen who risked their lives and
purses during every trading journey. Especially to distant countries.
They distributed the money in accordance with special
documents. It followed for them to compile these in such ways that
their financial secrets never fell into strange hands. Therefore, they
wrote them using a special scri pt. Without. vowels. Without
punctuation marks which would help someone to guess what the
letter was about. Even without capital letters. The scri pt was called
Hebrew.
They didn't contrive it specially. The priestly castes, including
also a caste of monotheists, had used such methods of intercourse
for a long time. It is enough to recall Egyptian Hieroglyphs and
Minoan writing.
The lingua franca, free language, language of international
intercourse, the language of commerce was the Aramaic language.
If one investigates, it was not able to be otherwise. Only th~
educated people, as today, traded and transacted finances, and
they were entirely the Jewish monotheists. Therefore, their
language also lay at the basis of the scri pt.
By the way, an interesting hypothesis has been put forth about
the origin of Latin letters in particular from it. But - in a mirror
image. The simplest method of cryptology.

israel
In1zl

Inscriptions /11 mirror image for compariSQfl of Hebrew and Latin alphabets

They took the famous Aramaic, or Hebrew, so well known to

everyone and in the mirror they got... Latin.

326
 ~,*. t, >-<. 6. ~ ~.**.""'. 8.
0:-:. :f:u t )o(.~.(t,.JtO{}l.. ~ Lt.
c:f. tT,! --ED t.-f: 9. f.. Z.Y. A.
~.~"t C61 . t ..~.oo/t~ fi.~.
~.& ..G...2:../'\.~ ~..6.~.~.
For the most serious business messages, but of course, the most
serious cryptogram was used, which was based on a n.umerical
cipher, with the addition of a literal cipher. with a displacement
according to the days. that is according to all the rules of
conspirology. And these rules arc set forth in the kabala. Only
the Masters knew it.
The house of Medici from Florence developed the idea of
opening a bank. As early as the 15th century, the wealth of the
house of Medici was nearly 10 million dollars translated into
modern currency. This was a huge amount of money (or those
times. The Medicis kept three fourths of their capital outside Italy.
In France alone they had 24 divisions of the bank. The fact that
the popes preferred to exact payments due them in the European
countries through Italian merchants, especially the Lombardi,
enabled the development of the money operations in Italy to a
significant degree.
The French King Jean Valois reacted first to the situation that
was taking place. In 1360, he produced a gold coin· the French
franc, on which was inscribed Francorum rex, that is, King of the
Franks, and the whole territory, which was subject to the king became
Fnmco, that is, a territory of free trade, without direct taxation.
By the way, not only the wise king stamped coins. Every new
prince tried to stamp his own coin. "In the impetuous inter-prince
score settlings of the 14-1Sth centuries, some princes perished so
quickly that they were not able to get into the chronicles, but
nonetheless they succeeded in immortalizing their names on coins,"
reports Mole Man (Internet). "Historians know about the existence

327
of the Goroden princi pality and its capital Goroden only from
coin inscri ptions. About where it was located one can judge
indirectly only by the topography of fortuitous coin finds" ("How
\Ve Look for Ancient Russian Coins").
"In short", writes Le Goff in "Medieval Civilization", "money
became a symbol of political and social power to a greater extent
than economic might. Scenes of stamping coins occupy a fairly
good place in the iconography: we see them in Saint·Martin·de·
Boscherville, SOllvegny, and Worms".
And how did they make the coins? Here the historians and
specialists in linguistics have no doubts.
"Until the 14th century, instruments necessary for stamping
such as iron punches, gouges, chisels and the like, did not exist. In
the English language (the Webster dictionary) the word chisel, which
simultaneously means cutter, punch, gouge, chisel and die, appeared
only in the 14th century. This word is the same as the French
ciseau, which deSignates that same set of instruments (besides the
die itself). But the English puncheon (dje), which also was noted
for the first time in the 14th century, calculates the French "pu(a)nson",
writes Yaroslav Kesler. "Let us add that also the meaning of 'vise'
appeared in the English language in the 16th century".
There are neither "ancient Greek" nor Latin names of the above
mentioned instruments.
Various emblems arc engraved on many of the coins. But heraldry
is an offspring of the Middle Ages, I. Shumach reminds us. The
work of the Italian jurist Bartolo, whose "Tractatus de Insigniis et
Armis" was published in 1356 is conSidered the earliest work with
an account of the rules of heraldry. So, if they find "ancient" coins
with heraldic emblems, this is the most reliable indicator that it
isn't worth talking about any kind of antiquity where they are
concerned.
When the adherents of the traditional chronology establish
"moneyless" centuries in history, their assertions basically contradict
the monetary law: once money once appears in circulation, it may
disappear from circulation due to unsettled conditions but, in the
long run, its quantity tends to increase. Whenever centuries on
end are declared to be a "money less period" in chronology, then, a
falsification of history is occurring. One can violate thc law of
economics in theory, but not in practice.
Thus, any "ancient" coin call be dated, at the earliest, to the second
half of the 14th century, and the Stunc holds true for an "ancient" book

328
in which the word "coin" or its local equivalent is encountered.
Let us emphasize the most important point here again: there
was an objective need for coins. Commercial and monetary
relations required them, and required that they be made to
established, objective standards. Given such uniformity, rates of
exchange could exist. Without uniformity in weight and fineness,
coins (whether foreign or domestic) are no more than pieces of
metal of doubtful value. What good are coins if they cannot be
spent or exchanged?
Further: exchange rates themselves are senseless without special
financial organizations, even in their most primitive forms, and
without elementary systems of accounting and calculation. Was
all this found in "ancient" Persia, in "ancient" Greece and in the
Europe "conquered by the Huns"?
The traditional historians do not ask such questions. The
colorful descri ptions of chests with coins and diamonds c'lptured
on campaigns and stored in the most secret caves in the manner of
the fairy tales of a "Thousa.nd and One Nights", which bec,ame known
by the way only in the 18th century, suit thcm fully. Arabic philologist
Claudia Ott dctected that tales were written by orienta list Antuan
Galan and published in 1704 (La Republicca, 10.6.2004).
Howevcr, we arc dealing not with fairy tales, but with history.
And they are obliged to say that without money, without commercial
and monetary relations, the empire technically was nol able to be
created. Mobile troops, means of communication - transportation
and intercommunications, without which intensive trade is impossible,
and financial structures - lhese are the main preconditions for the
existence of a single land state of large dimensions. When they
appeared, then the ambitious ideas of the BYZ<'1ntine rulers who were
striving for world supremacy could be realized.
After the conquest of territory, economic interests mainly
troubled New Rome. Local conflicts unavoidably arose in places.
However, local "score settlings", whether between Russian princes,
French counts or Tatar Khans, didn't worry thc capital very much
so long as they did not interrupt the recei pt of tribute. But if
tbis happened, then the center took the most drastic measures.
There are more than a few descri ptions in the documents of that
period of a different sort of invasions of the "unclean", the
"barbarians", the "heathens", the "Normans" and the like. These
reflect not so much the civil strife within the Empire as the repression
by the central authority of a different sort of unrest and uprising:
329
the refusal of any region or city to pay taxes (tribute) - that is,
with the undermining of the state's economic base.
The example of the Russian prince Alexander Nevsky is
interesting from this perspective. He had the "Khan's charte",
that is the center's authorization which was issued yearly (in
German jaehrlich) to the regional governmenl (now they would
call it governor). Yarl (Prince) Alexander periodically beat the
"Swede" Yarl BirgeI' while, at the same time managing not to damage
relations with the "Tatar" Khan Berkc, thc younger brother of
Batu. Information in the biographies of Birge.. and Berke concur
down to the smallest details (for example, the years involved are
1200·1266.) In Mauro Orbini's book on the hislory of the Slavic
Rus, published by Peter the Great in 1722, lhe "Tatar - Swedc"
Berke - BirgeI' is simply one person - the Slavic King Berikh.
The eSsence of the complex relationshi ps of the two yarls -
Berikh and Alexander - is simple: Berke· Berikh, on instruction
of the center, conducted a census of the Russians in 1257, and this
directly affected the regional interests which Nevsky defended.
Here the king also had fleeced Berke, because a census would
instantly uncover the hidden revenue.
The fact that Berikh - BirgeI' - Berke is the imperial collector of
tribute becomes obvious once one considers that in Rumanian and
in Moldovan, "bir" meant "tribute", and in Norwegian, birk is a
circuit judge, appointed by the center. And even the ancient "capital"
(that is, the place of tax collection) of the Swedcs was called Birka.
And now let us recall that in Tatar "bar" means "there are" (that is,
in the given inst.:1.ncc, "the tribute has bccn gathered"), and "yoke"
means "no" (that is, "there is no tribute"). This Tatar yoke corrcsponds
exactly to the English yoke. And hence the notion itself of "yoke":
"a debtor who has not paid on time goes into slavery and they put
a yoke on him ("Russkaya Pravda" of Yaroslav t-'Iudry).
About what kind of "Tatar" yoke can one speak? About
which "raids of the Vikings"? In the view of common robbers, all
this is the activity of the empire's "tax police" and no more than
that. But to the tax collector, there is truly "neither Hellene nor
Jew" • there are only tax-payers.
Today no one thinks about whal the "titles of nobility" of the
feudal landlords originally meant: count, marquis, baron and the
like. And you see. for example, German "count" originally meant
"clerk". The Italian "count" is conte, as too the French comic,

330
which meant "calculation". In English, the very same words "count"
and "to count" are written and read generally identically: count.
The highest titles of the noblemen in Russia sounded thus:
chamberlain, equerry, falconer and the like. That is, these were
people who were body servants of the rulers - looking after their
bedrooms, stables, hunting falcons, etc. After the fall of Byzantium,
the heirs of these former clerks and accountants who had worked
in the service of the empire became "counts" in the new European
countries. So there is no big difference between the Russian
departmental dyak (that is, minister) and the French "duke" (that
is, duke) in the 15th century (Yaroslav Kesler).
The ludais, an imperial caste, were the most numerous and the
most important merchants and collectors of taxes. The main reason
for this was that their monopoly in the fulfillment of these tasks
was secured as a supreme power. The monotheists, we repeat,
possessed writing, had their own ci phers and secret codes,
maintained solid financial ties at great distances and with all
regions. It was a real commercial and financial brotherhood, which
drew all the empire's provinces into its influence.
Some consider it an ominous web which entangled the arms
and legs of the Ecumene. It would be more precise and objective
to call it the empire's circulatory system, although extremely secretive
and conservative.
It isn't necessary to explain how the ta.xpayers related to the
publicans. They hated the collectors of the taxes sincerely and deeply
at all times, and their names became synonymous of the worst that
there can be in a man. They called them "aliens", "foreigners", "others",
in a word - "Hebes". They were foreign and alien to everyone. In
Rus the abusive word "busu.rman" appeared (from the German
Besteuermann - "a collector of taxes, a publican"). Still, they were
only government agents, "slaves of the treasury", as they figuratively
called them in the Middle Ages in the empire's legislative acts.
Innocent, the Archbishop of Kherson and Tavrida, writes:
"Besides an unWillingness to pay the duty, they saw in them the
instrument of enslavement... Therefore, the "publican" and "unclean"
were honored with eqUivalent words".
The English theologian CH Dodd adds: "The deep hatred
which accompanies the word "publican", is explained by the special
position of these people... Worse than that, the ta.xes enriched the
hated foreign rulers or their proteges, the local petty monarchs.

331
Therefore, they saw in the publicans the servants of the enemy.
The Jews who had accepted such a responsibility were damned".
They hated the Jew publicans in the East, too.
Here is a characteristic passage from Konissky's "History of
the Russ", which relates to 1625-1635:
"The Easter loaves sold in the cities were kept under watch of
Polish village constables. He who had on his breast the inscri ption
"uniat" bought the pashka (that is the Easter loaf) freely, he who
did not have this inseri ption paid a duty of 38 Polish grosz.
In many places, the Easler tax was handed over to the Jews,
who levied the tribute without mercy... On the first day of Easter,
when the Orthodox believers brought the already paid for pashka
to the churches, the Jews, out of fear of forgery, appeared in the
churchyard, were present during the consecration of the pashka
and there and then marked with chalk or coal both the market
and the home baked pashka, which were paid for with the tax".
It is difficult to regard such people kindly. One can only
curse and banish them from decenl society. As the well-known
French historian Ernest Renan thinks: "These unfortunate people,
who had been banished from society, were seen only among their
own kind". Such total isolation is similar to that of the
untouchables in India.
Thus, the publicans and members of their families, in the opinion
of historians, are the outcasts of the imperial world. But then it is
not understood how so many of then occupied such high levels in
the state's hierarchy, and the highest in particular. Documents which
will be discussed somewhat further below are evidence of this.
But for the time being let us say that Lhey became even sacrOS<1nct.
Jesus, having passed a place of the collection of taxes, saw a pubJic<U1
named Levy, the son of Alpheus, sitting at the seat of custom.
"Follow Me", He said to him.
There is everything in this episode: both the scat of custom - a
place for collection of duty, and the calling of a publican hated by
everyone to the assembly of apostles. Christ evidently followed
the example of the strong of the world.
Spain, England, Venice, Florence. Khazaria, Rus ... Commercial
and usurious houses, the Genoan and Venetian fleet, the Hanse
and Lombard alliance, all belonged to the Judais. In Turkey and
Bukhara, Samarqand and Teheran, pagan Khazaria and the Uigur
Kaganate - they, the Judais. were at the head of commercial and

332
financial organizations everywhere. They received a papal bull
conveying to them the exclusive monopoly over financial activities
in Europe. In Russia the royal monopoly for Spaza shops and
taverns belonged to them. The orders of the Knights Templar,
Hospitaller and Teutons protect, cared for and coddled them.
It is not important that they speak in different languages:
Yiddish, Ladino, Spharadit, Polish, Farsi, - it isn't important that
they sing different songs and even have a different color of skin.
They are the servants of the state. Everyone needs them when it
is necessary to borrow money at interest, and they are hated by
everyone when it is necessary to pay it back.
The state took care of them more than life itself: it was
unthinkable to kill a goose that was laying such golden eggs. The
authorities catered to them in everything - even the creation of
exclusive communities where the publicans and financiers were
able to live peacefully with families, collect the taxes before sending
them to the center, and carryon the complicated bookkeeping
work. Such settlements helped besides to segregate the financial
network from the influence of local princelings and to subordinate
it only to the capital.
The book of Joshua contains a curious text. Here are the lines
from it:
"So by command of the Lord the people of Israel gave to the
Levites the following cities and pasture lands out of their
inheritance" .
And the Levites live in special sheltered cities. Their official
conformity to the hierarchy of the castes was indicated precisely:
"The Lord's servants". Not of the princes, not of the governors,
even not of the kings. The Lord's.
These legendary sheltered cities are surprising - if in nothing
else by the fact that they are located within already existing cities.
Their names have been preserved in the languages and toponymy
of all peoples: The Jewish quarters, the Jew Outskirts, the Jew
Islands, the Ghetto.
Yes, the "ghetto".
The researcher A. Sinel'nikov has analyzed a map of Venice,
which was the primary commercial and financial center of Europe
in the Middle Ages. If one sails along the Grand Canal from Saint
Mark's Square and the Doge's Palace upwards to the Palazzo Calergi
and the Palazzo Labia, then directly behind them, at the confluence

333
of the Northern Cimal into it, is located the cannon factory and
powder warehouses region with the name "GHETIO". No one was
even able to dream that the word gheta, a cannon casting shop,
would become through the centuries the name itself of the Jewish
quarters in many countries.

1. Palav.o Vendramin'Calergi 16. Pala1.7.0 Contarini del Bavolo

2. Fondaco del Turchi 17. San Marco
3. Scalzi 18. Palazzo Ducale
4. Palazzo Pezaro 19. Old Procurators
5. COl d'Oro 20. New Procurators
6. Santa Marla dei l\'!iracoli 21. Caffil>anile
7. Scuola San Marco 22. Library of Saint Mark
8. Santi Giovani e Paolo 23. Palazzo Foscari
9. San Simeone Piccolo 24. Palazzo Re1.l0nico
10. Rialto Bridge 25. La Fcnice 2
11. Scuola San Rocco 6. San Moise
12. Frari 27. Palazzo Contarilll·Fasan
13. Palauo Lorcdan 28. Gallcric dell' Accademia
14. Palazzo FarseW 29. Santa Maria della Salute
15. Palauo Grimani 30. San Giorgio Maggiore

334
 The center of Venice itself is the most ancient region of Rialto,
from which it also started. Alongside is the port, the Ducale Palace,
and Saint Mark's Square. The most guarded and forbidden region
is the arms warehouses. A most convenient region for commerce,
alongside are two of the main canals and the lagoon. Opposite are
the warehouse region and the commercial rows. One may suppose
that famous Venetian glass-blowers lived and worked in this region,
or the sea wolves of the great Venetian fleet headed by the Moorish
admiral Othello, or the guard of the Venetian state.

.
~

Nothing like it. The money-lender Shylock lived here, recorded

by Shakespeare in the" Merchant of Venice", a Jew, a miscr, and in
general, in the opinion of his debtors. a very bad man.
Yes, here in particular, in thc best location, the Jews were lodged.
Those who were not subordinate to the doges and who lived by
their own laws and who moreover sent the accounts heaven knows
where. Here, alongside the Fondaco dei Turchi (the Turkish House)
and the Scalz, almost opposite the great Ca d'Oro (Golden I-louse)
the Spagnola synagogue rises.
The scheme of placing an inncr-city quarter of tax collectors in
the most protccted and convenient place in a commercial regard,

335
after its approbation in Venice, went into circulation. Counterpart,;
of the Venetian "Ghetto" appeared everywhere with the construction
of new imperial cities or the winning for themselves of better places
in the old towns, while partly forcing oul the commercial enclaves.
In many instances they become the embryos of new cities, growing
up around the customs yard under the protection of guards.
The Roman ghetto, the Jewish quarters on Rhodos, Malta, Cyprus,
Crete, and the Novgorod Jewish enclave are examples of ancient
settlement sites or quarters of the first type. The Jewish quarter in
Jerusalem, according to William of Tyre and Fulcher of Chartres,
which was located where the Moslem quarter is now, next to the
customs yard, and also the Jewish enclaves in Kiev, Lubeck, Salamanca
and other cities, was related to the second type.
Finally, the basis of such cities as Paris, London and Clairvaux
was the so-called City (Cite), at which the "Jewish" origin is
easily guessed. lie de la City in Paris was called the lewish island
until recenUy. And brothers from lhe Clairvaux abbey bore the
name of Jewish brothers.
Exactly the same situation is observed also in the East. The
famous "tvlellacb" in Morocco and "hara" (an abbreviation from
harat al-yahud - the Jewish quarter) in the countries of the Middle
East are exact copies of the "ghetto".
It is interesting that there was no "ghetto" in Florence, but there
were also no fortress walls there. In the capital of Tuscany, the heart
of Etruria, there was nothing for the Florentine dukes to fear. They
wrer, after all, not vassals, not servants, but friends of the state. This
being the case, the servants of the state lived with them in freedom.
There was not one ghetto in the Osman Empire. Neither was
a ghetto found in Rus, including Poland, Finland and the Baltic.
Warsaw aquired one only in the presence of the Nazis. But this is
another story.
How was the life of the foreigners· the "Jews" - distinguished
from the life of the local inhabitants?
In the first place, by strict autonomy, which amounted to self-
isolation. It is important to emphasize: it was not an isolation by
those around them, but primarily and mainly a self-isolation on their
own part. It is not for nothing researchers critically disposed to the
Jews emphasize that "the ghetto walls were built from both sides".
Such a city had its own police force - the guild watch.

336
 Each such city had its own government - the "kagal" (council),
headed by "cohen" and "mukadmin", who were independent of the
local authority and who did not report to it. All cohens in the
ghetto had only one ruler over them - a "Jewish bishop", a "court
rabbi". In Spain he bore the title Rab del Corte, in literal translation
"judicial slave".
Add to this a treasury and a school· truly a state withln a state.
And one more trait of this caste's life. Closed communities
had the right to their own flags and coats of arms. For example,
the Prague community had a banner decorated with a Star of
David. Note that the right to a pennon (a banner) and coat of
arms was secured only by the dictate of a monarch and given
either for service to the sovereign or for patrimonial services.
(Yaroslav Kesler)
The local authorities had no jurisdiction in this territory.
The ghetto had its own court - a "lesser Sanhedrim" (from the
Aramaic "sanhedrin" - a "meeting") or "dayanim." It consisted of
23 members of the community and was subordinate only to the
Great Sanhedrin which was located somewhere far away, at the
Temple.
The legislative base developed was collected in a code of
instructions under the name of the "Galaha" (or "Gamara"), that is
"The Way". The Mishna was the codified law which was created
on the basis of the Galaha. It included 63 treatises and the 6 parts
in them - the sedarim - spanned all facets of the society's life and
expounded the style of behavior of a caste member in all spheres of
his existence.
1. Zeraim (Seeds) regulates Questions connected with
agriculture and contained a treatise on daily prayers.
2. Moed (Period) is devoted to holidays, fasts and the Sabbath.
3. Nashim (Women) touches on, in particular, questions of
marriage, divorce, matrimonial infidelity, nazareev (that is,
monasticism) and vows.
4. Nezikim (Damages) explained Questions of damage, commercial
law, judicial procedure, the death penalty and oaths. TillS section
also contains the treatise on ethics - Avot (Dicta of the fathers.)
5. Kodashim (Holy Things) is about sacrifices, rituals and
service.
6. Taharot (Purifications) is about problems of ritual

337
purity and impurity.
The text of the Mishna is distinguished by a diversity in language,
style and presentation. This shows that it was compiled over a long
time and by different authors; in a word, they corrected it over the
course of many decades. And, what is very important, it was renewed.
Supplemental collections of rules appeared, in particular, the Baraita -
a supplement to the Mishna. Its name in Aramaic, "baraita", is literally
"externa1." Afterwards the "Shulhan Arukh" (The "Set Table") arose -
a collection which explains the civil and criminal law and adjusts
the rules of everyday life, holidays and marriage. In this, questions of
the acceptability of food, of ritual purity and regulations concerning
mourning also are exanlined in it in detail.
It is not difficult to understand why this was necessary if one
remembers the times when the "Set Table" was created. Epidemics
of the plague and cholera rebounded one after the other in the
Middle Ages in Europe, carrying away hundreds of thousands of
lives. Quarantine service laws were needed as much as air to
breathe. It was not considered possible to survive without them
in the overcrowded cities. Educated people, the Jews created these
laws. They more closely than anyone else approximated an
understanding of the nature of the deathly illness and worked out

special rules of hygiene and sanitation.

It is no accident that, from those times on, emigrants from the
Jewish Ghettos had the reputation of being the best doctors. Any
feudal lord who respected himself had in his court or castle a
Jewish court doctor.

338
 Let us return, however, to the financial activity of the publicans.
In short, it came down to the fact that, in the process of collecting
the taxes (the tribute), they created the foundations of the modern
financial and commercial system. In particular, they contrived
account books with debit and credit accounting. Afterwards, bank
checks and billing. The holding as security of a debtor's property,
that which now is known under the name "Lombard broker" (a
pawn shop) named after its founding users the Lombards is also
4 4

their invention. They introduced monitoring of the purity and

content of gold and silver in coins, assaying it for the collection
of tithes and taxes, the levying of fines and for the violation of
laws - even from the monarchs and church hierarchs at the local
level. If one makes an analogy with our times, they carried out the
functions of tax enforcement. or the structure, which provided
uninterrupted operation of the worldwide financial network.
And they hit upon the registration of business. The system also
was involved with customs and port duties, the financing of
expeditions, construction, and colonization - everything where an
investment of money was required. It was from here that the power
of the state tax collectors grew! The economy was supported by them.
The question naturally arises: that which the Jews were able
to count is understood, but how did they train their personnel?
Where did they study?
As the documents confirm, the empire's financial bureaucracy
was responsible not only for the collection of taxes. They also
collected knowledge. They reported to Czarigrad, to the capital,
the main repository of knowledge, about all discoveries and
inventions, about various curiosities and unusual natural
phenomena. They called it Babylon - Babylon (from the Greek
Biblos - a book). The expansion of knowledge also occurred through
those very same bureaucratic governors.
Emerging from the Arian worshi p of Wisdom - of Sophia,Jcwish
culture was distinguished by an anxious regard for knowledge. Not
only that, literacy in an illiterate sphere fed the Jews, knowledge
served also as a hopeful defense when the environment became
hostile. The population gazed upon the educated publicans as upon
sorcerers. They hated them, but they were also afraid of them.
One can determine this with certainty. It is known how the
aborigines of America and Australia perceived the written language

339
which was brought by white people. They considered that this
teaching for writing was some kind of religious ritual and that a
book was a living being, which was able to speak and see. A case is
described when a native messenger refused to take a written
message, fearing that it would talk with him along the road. In
another case, a native carried to a neighboring Village four loaves
of bread and a letter with an indication of the quantity of loaves.
He ate one of them along the way, and they, naturally, exposed
him. The next time, before he had the bread, he hid the letter in a
hollow, but the truth again triumphed. Then he beat the letter in
order that it might no longer inform on him (S. Valyansky and
D. Kalyuzhny "Another History of the Middle Ages").
The peoples of Europe, Africa and Asia perceived the written
language and knowledge in exactly the same way in bygone days.
In such a situation, it was better for the Jew to know and know
how to do as much as possible, even cultivating a reputation for
occult abilities. Otherwise they might stop being afraid.
Education is one of the foundations of Judaism. Talmud
situations confirm this:
"Resch was speaking on behalf of the Rabbi Yehuda to the
prince: 'The world exists only for the sake of the breath which
comes out of the mouth of schoolchildren... We do not cease the
instruction of children, even to build the Temple'." (Shabbat 119
h, according to the Talmud, S. 264).
"Rabbi Hyya, SOil of Abba, was saying that Rabbi Johanan
said: all prophets without exception only of those advised, he
who gives a daughter to a sage as wife, he who is in business for a
sage and he who allows a sage to receive his good from him."
(Bracbot 34 b ; Talmud, S. 265).
There also is a repolt about a Jewish school in Amsterdam (the
year 1680) from Rabbi Sabbatai ben Joseph Bass. Among other things,
he reports that teachers are paid from a special community fund and
are not supposed, therefore, to flatter "any people, and every schoolboy,
whether poor or rich, can receive an education to an equal degree".
Schoeps, Judische Geisteswelt ("The Jewish World of the Mind").
The disci pIe Pierre Abelard expressed it so: "Christian children
receive education not from religious motives. They hope that the
cider brother, who has become a clerk. will help his parents and
his younger brothers... A Jew, whether poor or not, even if he has

340
ten sons, sends all of them to study, not for the sake of wages as the
Christians do, but for the sake of learning the Law, and not only
his sons, but his daughters, too". ("Great Jewish Personalities in
Ancient and Medieval Times", editor Simon Novek, page 240).
Jewish education reached its height in 12th century Western
Europe. The common circle of learning included the Torah, Hebrew,
poetry, the Talmud, philosophy and its connection with revelation,
Euclid's Elements, arithmetic, optics, astronomy, music, mechanics,
medicine, the natural sciences and metaphysics. Here is how
William Lecky, the Irish historian and moralist, describes the
intellectual situation of the Jews in the Middle Ages: "While those
around them were groveling in the darkness of besotted ignorance...
while the intellect of Christiandom, enthralled by countless
superstitions, had sunk into a deadly torpor in which all love of
enquiry and all search for truth were abandoned, the Jews were
still pursuing the path of knowledge, amassing learning, and
stimulating progress with the same unflinching constancy that
they manifested in their faith. They were the most skillful
physicians, the ablest financiers, and among the most profound
philosophers. ("History of the Rise and Influence of the Spirit of
Rationalism in Europe," Volume II, page 271).
Yes, the Judais were approaching the training of staff responsibly.
But to train them from childhood is an undertaking of many
years, and people are needed as early as today. Therefore, every year,
before the Passover and at the end of the summer, the shi ps of the
Venetian, Pisan, Amalfitani and Marseilles merchants delivered to
the ports of the city of New Rome - Constantinople batches of new
recru-its from Southern France, Italy, Germany and Flanders. The
new arrivals studied, some for a long time, some quickly, and went
back to Europe, replenishing the financial and economic network of
the world.
By now, the formation was being applied in the region of Lake
Lugano, in modern SWitzerland, of the margraviate of Jewry and
Lothargirtia at the middle and lower course of the Rhine and in
the Moselle valley. Both of these formations fulfilled the functions
of the Empire's intermediate customs yard in the presence of the
collection of tithes in the western lands.
And there are other places in the center of Europe which were
intermediate links in the financial and economic network. No less

341
than five villages in the Carpathian Alps bear the name "Judendorf"
to this day. In the mountains of Styria are counted even more
"Judenburgs" and "Judenshtadts". "At the zenith of the Middle
Ages we discover to the east a scattering of settlements (Jewish),
which extend from Bavaria to Persia itself". (Mieses, M., Die
Entstehuogsuhrsache der judischen Oialekte, Berlin, 19t5).
In addition to everything, new brotherhoods arose, close in
nature to orders. Several such brotherhoods are well 4known: that
of Saints Andrew and Peter, which was created in Accra, of Pisans,
of the Holy Spirit, of Saint James, a brotherhood named after
King Edward the Confessor, the Guild of Freemasons, the Guild of
Minstrels... In comparison with the spiritual and chivalrous orders,
the brotherhoods were associations which included, chiefly,
merchants and craft masters.
Let us also clarify the question about what they taught at the
empire's financial courses, if modern terminology were used.
Traditional historians adhere to the notion that mathematics has
the most ancient of Indian, Egyptian and Arabic roots. In our
view, this is much too vague an assertion. Everywhere and at all
times people needed counting and ideas which were connected
with the measurement of distances, volume, weight and the like.
So, besides the roots named, it is possible to name others as well.
If one is to speak of modern mathematics, this was born in the
Middle Ages. There are serious foundations for such an assertion.
It is known that notwithstanding all its abstraction, this science
always has resolved and resolves concrete practical problems. Thus,
in particular the medieval rapid growth of the economy, the
construction of grandiose structures of the European cathedral type.
the navigational provision of around-the-world voyages and the
appearance of firearm types of weapons demanded the creation of
modern mathematical divisions.
One of them is algebra. A man by the name of Moses of
Khorezm, also called Al4Khorezmi, became its father. The work
"AI-Muhtasar fi hisab al-gabr wal·muqabala" was translated for the
first time supposedly in 1147 into Latin by Robert of Chester
under the title, "A Book of Algebra and Almucabola".
"Almucabola" is a term from the Judaic cabalistica. (Ralph
Davidson, Chris Luemen "Evidence and Analysis").
It was, naturally, much easier for the 19th century to confirm

342
the significance of the Jews in the development of economics and
finances than for the early tvliddle Ages. Too few original
documents of those centuries have been preserved to our time.
But to this day, no one has succeeded in explaining the medieval
development of the world without a hypothesis about the civilizing
role of Judaism. There does not exist in historical reality any
kind of rational, dynamic concept outside of Judaism which also is
oriented at competition and the marketplace.
Many researchers agree with this. Cyrus Gordon even writes:
..."the start of civilization cannot be separated from Judaic culture".
In financial documents, which nevertheless have been preserved
from those times, are sccn traces in particular of Judaic activity.
Thus, "many documents from the archive of the government of
Venice about commercial interests who conducted commerce with
the Middle East are in the Hebrew script". (Lewis,Juden).
In the customs statutes of the city of Rafelstetten, "merchant"
is a synonym for "jew". Such ideas as "bourgeois", "citizen" and
"Jew" also turn out to be synonyms.
A treaty concluded by Emperor Henry rv with the city of
Worms supposedly in 1074 (most likely in the 14th century) begins
with these words: "Judajs ceterisque civibus Wormsae ("To the jews
and other inhabitants of Worms") ( Bernt Engelmann, "Deutschland
ohne Judell" ["Germany without the jews"], Munich, 1974).
The Jews were named personally, all the remaining emperors
were not; they were, deprecatingly, "the others".
In the Middle Ages the Jews were used as the best organizers
of the princely and royal economies. They are indicated in the
documents correspondingly as "Servi Camerae" (court servants).
Their role in the East was similar. They were viewed there as,
in essence, the bearcrs of the economy. Omar I (according to the
traditional history, supposedly in the 7th century) reminded one
of the governors:
"Do you think that true believers would remain after us if we
had not taken into captivity also as slaves the infidels and had
not entrusted and not designated in the name of Allah in order to
derive benefit from their work?"
In an official Osman lettcr of 1567 to the governor of Safed
in Palestine it says: "a thousand rich and prosperous jews... with
their property and effects and with their families". This thousand

343
has to be sent to Cyprus so they can elevate the island's economy.
The governor of Cyprus answers that the order has been fulfilled:
"In the interests of the said island my noble command has
been written ... to conscribc and send 500 families from the Jews
of Safed". Moreover, he focuses attention on the fact that he will
send rich, and not poor Jews. (Bernard Lewis "The Jews of Islam").
A French Capuchin, who traveled in Turkey, wrote in 1681:
"There is not any kind of class of families beneath the Turks and
foreign merchants who would not have Jews employed. They
value merchandise and its quality, work as translators or give counsel
for all that it befits". Lady Mary Wortely Montague, who visited
Turkey in the 19th century, writes:
"I noted that the richest merchants were Jews. This people have
in this country an incredible force. They have many privileges in
comparison with Turkey's natives and constitute here a very significant
free state, since it is governed according to their own laws.
They have made all of the state's commerce too much their
own, in part because of strong ties with each other, and p'.lrtly
because of the current benevolence of the Turks in the absence of
their Vigilance. Any pasha has a Jew as a homme d'affaires (domestic
confidant), and he is let in on all secrets and guarantees all
business". (Durant, Bd. LG, S. 172).
German banking of lhe 19th century is the fruit of Judaic
development: "Both in earlier centuries and now the Christian
financiers were too careful to undertake unknown and risky ventures
and the solVing of new problems. This function was passed on ...
to the private entrepreneurial activity of the banks which were
created, in essence, by the Jews ... Along with the large banks arose
a whole series of small and medium Jewish banking offices, the
chief task of which is to assure credits for commerce and
enlrepreneurial <lclivity in today's ciUes thaL arc thriving by leaps
and bounds". (H. M. Graupe. "The Rise of Modern Judaism,"
Hamburg, 1969). Werner Sombart, a German economist and
historian, writes: "I bumped into the problem of the Jews completely
by accident when 1 was substantially revising my 'Modern
Capitalism'. All those component parts of puritanical dogm.\, which
we had been shown by those having knowledge for the formation
of the capitalistic spirit, were adopted from the ideological areas of
the Jewish religion".

344
 The period from the end of the 1Sth to the end of the 17th
centuries evokes special interest in Sam bart. He muses:
"The sudden decline of Spain, the sudden ascent of Holland,
the wasting away because of it of so many cities of Italy and
Germany and the prosperity of others, as, for example, Livorno,
Antwerp, Hamburg and Frankfurt, by 00 means seems explainable
with the former occasions (the discovery of a sea route to eastern
India, the shifting of state power relationships). And then the
most obvious appeared for me ... the parallelism between the
economic part of the states and the cities and the migrations of
the Jews ... And with the closest inspection it turned out that in
reality the Jews were the ones whom the decisive points of the
economic ascent needed. The ascenl occurred there where they
had appeared, and the decline appeared there from whence they
had gone".
In another place, Werner Sombart almost euphorically writes
that Judaism would have lo have been invented had it not existed.
By no means docs everyone agree with him. In the first place
are the rivals of the Jews. Complaints from those whom the Jews
had gotten round in commerce and finances reach us from various
centuries as a more able, educated and enterprising people.
In the travel notes of a Wallach (a Welshman) of the 18th
century it talks about "complaints against the business of the Je\vs:
"They... spoil all the business, setting low prices. We want to
force them to another price for our goods, in order to get the other
market which only he is able".
And here is a declaration of thread and garment merchants
(the year 1635) against lhe "ultra-driven" competition of the Jews:
"They walk up to soldiers, officers and commanders secretly
and openly when they corne to the city, toward the whole alley".
In princi pie the Jews are right: why sit and wait for when the
buyer will come to you? You have to go to him directly, perhaps
even to impose your own goods. Only in that way can onc earn
something. Today, such behavior is considered perfectly normal
and even canny. In the 17th century, they called these views which
are oriented toward competition spiteful and typically "Judaic".
Now and then they simply forbade them. In "Mayntzischen Policcy
Ordnung" ("Mainz Police Order"), the laws of the city of Mainz, Werner
Sombart found a poinl-blank prohibition of competition.

345
 The consumers, on the other hand, were not complaining. One
can understand them: the stronger the competition, the lower the
prices. Therefore, they were extremely satisfied with the dynamic
Judaic merchants and financiers. The Viennese court chancellor,
for example, adhered to such an opinion in t 762. He once again
needed money and turned to the Jews in Holland for a loan. Tn
the corresponding documents it spoke about it thus: "It is more
prudent to conclude a contract for military supplies with the Jews,
(since) ... it would be cheaper".
In England, as the historian Salo Baron reports, "they turned
into a class of 'royal money-lenders,' whose chief function was the
extension of credit for political and economic purposes". The social
and economic influence of the Jews was absurdly great, considering
their modest number, the researcher is convinced. And this served
as the reason of a tragic ending - the exile of 1290. The giddy
ascent and the more violent fall of English Jewry in only two and
a quarter centuries (t066~1290) highlights in contrast the
fundamental factors which determined the fate of all Western
Jewry". (Baron, S. W., Social and Religious History of the Jews,
New York, 1957).
They had been persona grata like the court alchemists because
the secret of the functioning of the economy was driven by them
alone. "In the early Middle Ages", wrote Cecil Roth, "the commerce
of Western Europe was largely in Jewish hands, not excluding the
slave trade, and in the Carolingian cartularies Jew and Merchant
arc llsed as almost interchangeable terms" (Roth, C., "The World
History of the Jewish People", London 1966).
After the Puritan Revolution of 1649, they tried to make friends
with the Jews in England. At that ~ seriously and for a long
time. A petition even W;:IS introduced in parliament that the
Christian Sunday be reconciled with the Jewish Sabbath. Then
the day off would be common. It also was proposed to form a state
council per the example of the S<Ulhedrim of seventy partici pants.
Major General Thomas Harrison advised Oliver Cromwell to
make the law of Moses a component part of English law. It is
worth dwelling on this proposal especially. If one is to recall the
princi pies of the building of Judaic communities and their
jurisdiction, then unexpected, at first glance, conclusions arise:
In essence, the early stages of munici pal democracy are laid in

346
them. They take into account the opinion of the population and
are gUided by the princi pies of social consent. They openly proclaim
the equality of people before the law. Public conflicts are decided
by independent courts. Both sides have the right to an appeal in
court hearings. Judaic affirmations about the supremacy of the law
of Moses, and not of logic and military force, were new and unusual
for the society of that time.
Medieval procedures prOVided for something completely
different: he who had the strength also had the rights. And the
kings, khans, sultans and tsars were used to them here, there and
everywhere. A refusal of them signified a huge step ahead in the
construction of society on more equitable princi pIes. And here the
major general gave a tribute of respect to the law of Moses.
Friendshi p with the Jews did not come about: local merchants
were more afraid of competition than of the king's iron fist. And
therefore, torrents of slander and filth poured upon the possible
competitors. Oliver Cromwell objected:
"You contend that the Jews are the lowest and most distained
among peoples. How then are you able seriously to fear that this
distained people can be victorious over such a most honorable,
illustrious... English merchant class in entrepreneurial and credit
activity?" (Keller, 371).
It is logical and ingenious, but when it is a question of money,
people forget about logic and humor. So, Cromwell was not able
to convince the merchant class, although he understood that the
broad partici pation of the Jews in the economy and finances of
England was morc than desirable.
He knew this not by hearsay. The Jews offiCially had been
forbidden in his times to live in England, but only officially. Many
lived and flourished, haVing received a Judaic education, on an
order of magnitude better than the Christian. They disgUised
themselve..<; as Portuguese merchants, but it was known to all who
they were. For exanlple, the personal physician of Queen Elizabeth
I was a Portuguese Jew. The Portuguese ambassador, Antonio de
Souza, who had· a reputation as a lavish creditor of London's elite,
also was a secret Jew. True, so "secret" that all the royal court
talked about it.
By the way, even in France they were called "Portuguese
merchants". They lived in Saint-Jean de Luz, Bordeaux, Saint-Esprit-

347
Ie-Bayonne, and also in the border regions, in the Pyrenees and
Landes. It was possible to encounter them in Biarritz, Marseilles,
Lyon, Nancy. Rauen, Paris and in the French colonies in America, in
particular on Martinique. Eight bills, adopted between 1550 and
1656, allowed the "Portuguese" to settle in the kingdom's territory.
In the Middle Ages the papacy was among the chief protectors
of the Jews. A papal bull, sicut judeis, was published which
guaranteed protection of the Jews. This document remained in
force throughout all of the Middle Ages. The lively commerce
between Italy and the Osman Empire, in which the Jews took part,
made their presence desirable for any regimes who were attempting
to develop the economic life of their country, and the papacy was
no exception. They allowed the Jews to have defined privileges
in different cities and states. Thus, a Sephardic printing house
was created in Ferrara in which in 1553 a translation into the
Spanish of Biblical text· the so-called Ferrara Bible· was published.
Starting from 1573·74, Venice also became olle of the largest centers
of the Ponantais (how they called the Western Sephards).
The Netherlands. From the beginning of the 16th century,
Antwerp, which was under the control of the Hapsburgs, accepted
the Marano. The Jews played a significant role in commerce with
the Spanish and Portuguese territories of the New World. They
were especially active in the framework of the Dutch West India
Company, which carried out trade with the northern territories of
Brazi I.
As regards the East, the documents preserved for us the names
of Jews who bec;lme prominent Moslem figures after it became too
dangerous to be Jews. Here are some of them.
Ya'kub ben KilIis, a Jew who converted to Islam. Born in
Baghdad, he was moved in Levant to Ramla, where he became a
leader of the merChaJlts (according to Wakil al Tujjar.) Afterwards
he moved to Egypt and, finally, to Tunis. He helped the Tunisians
in the conquest of Egypt, reorganized Egypt for the Tunisian
Fatimites and made it the center of the state. (Bernard Lewis
"The Jews of Islam").
The reforms of Ya'kub ben Killis also touched upon financial
structure and monetary concerns. Moslem historians display the
highest possible recognition of his services. Some point to him even
as a specialist in Islamic jurisprudence. Thus, a Jew stood at the

348
origins of the first historically competitive Egyptian Moslem state.
A Jew by the name of Ka'b al-Ahbar, who also converted to
Mohammedanism, became well-known in the East. Bernard Lewis
reads his name Ka'b as Yakov or Akiba, at that time as Agbar - a
title for learned men in the higher institutions of learning of the
Middle East (literally "akbar" is "great"). Yakov, or Akiba, in Islamic
literature is considered a prominent teacher, commentator and
propagandist of traditions.
Hasdai ben Saprut, an adviser to cali phs, simultaneously was a
leader of Spanish Judaism. Secretary Menahem ben Saruch was
the court physician to the caliph Abd ar-Rahman [II and the
author of the first Hebrew dictionary.
One of the most interesting figures of the early Middle Ages is
the Jew Samuel ha-Nagid, a grand vizier in Granada. He was a
king, warrior and poet... And these are only those about whom
reports were maintained in documents.
But let us return to Europe.
Modern economists, while studying the role and significance of
the Jcws in the dcvelopment of the economy of the European Middle
Ages, say that thcy, the Jews, in fact built a new society. They call it
"civil", they use the terms "bourgeois revolution" and "commercial
revolution" (Solomon Goitein "Jews and Arabs" 1974, New York).
Maybe it is. It is not for nothing that in 1810, the Kurfuersten
Prussian nobility lodged a complaint at the Hardenberg state
chancellery because of the introduction of the economic princi pies
of the French Revolution. They wrote of the grievous insult:
"Our old upright Brandenburg Prussia is being converted
into a Jewish state" (Friedrich Foster, "A History of Wars of
Liberation," Berlin, 1861).
The new economic policy and authority of the Jews was one
and the same idea for the PrussiaJl noblemen. Having made this
clear, we, the people of the 21st century, are beginning to understand
from where that hatred toward them, publicans and money-lenders
has been taken, which the Christian financiers and merchants have
experienced, when their time had arrived and it was necessary to
take economic power away from the Jews in the world. Everything
was used that was able to discredit the competitors. Expressing it
in modern language, in Christian times there occurred a global
redistribution of commercial and financial property which was

349
accompanied by a religious and ideological campaign on a grandiose
scale for discrediting the former financiers and merchants.
The Jews themselves well understood their own role in the
economy of all countries. The Babylonian Talmud is evidence of
it, which originated supposedly many centuries before the new
era: "It is taught: Rabbi Eliezer says: If they had not considered
us necessary for commerce and lransition, then they would have
had to beat us to death". (Pesachim 4gb, Talmud, 213).

350
 CHAPTER SEVENTEEN

The dissolution of the empire. It is rather difficult to describe

it. Reality in historical works is shielded by phantom empires,
concocted by medieval chronologists in order to fill time vOids
with events, heroes and rulers in a contrived panorama of centuries
and millennia. As expressed by Bernard Guenee, the first medieval
historians were "virtuosi with regard to chronology". They dealt
with their problem so successfully that even today it arouses
amazement in us. "Histoire et culture historique dans l'occident
medieval" .
Therefore, it is necessary most of all to determine the evidence
of the phantom quality of the majority of these empires. They are
revealed especially clearly in the analysis of the reasons for their
disappearance.
One and the very same scheme of collapse is observed everywhere:
the push of barbarians who knew no mercy, the lack of talent of
those bogged down in the depravity of the emperors, the sinister
confluence of circumstances and internal discord and strife. It is
practically impossible to find anything else on the pages of the
traditional historic works. And the authors did not need anything
else. Political realities and economics are boring things. An account
of barbarian atrocities or imperial depravity allowed exaggerating
the dramatic effect of events, imbuing the narration with bright
details, colors, and psychological nuances, that is, everything that
imparts to the books the luster of literary products. It is no accident
the German historian Theooor Mommsen was awarded a Nobel
Prize for literature for his work on ancient Rome.
Real empires broke apart for different reasons.
At first, the victorious mother countries possessed
overwhelming military, economic and political supremacy over the
conquered regions. They were the complete masters. One would
like especially to emphasize this decisive feature: masters, but not

351
highway robbers. Robbers do not care how people will live after
their foray, or whether they will live at all. Scorched earth and
corpses remain after predatory assaults.
The mother count!)' had other goals: to grow steadily rich, and
the more SO the more complicated, owing to the exploitation of the
colonies. But objective economic laws came into play here. The
development of manufacturing demands an uninterrupted growth
of the quality of labor and managemcnl. And this inevitably resulted
in the empires not only extorting from t.he ci.lpturcd lands everything
possible, but also they were forced t.o invest in them, speaking
generally, both assets and knowledge. Independent of their
aspirations, they promoted the gradual strengthening of the role of
local merchants, craftsmen and landowners. Able leaders of all levels
were appearing ever increasingly in the colonies, the most talented
of whom studied at. the center. Ever more educated people were
required in connection wit.h the compleXity of equi pment and
technologies, and, therefore, schools opened in the local level, and in
later times even higher educational institutions. Thus, the mother
countries, speaking figuratively, had grown their own "grave diggers."
The moment unavoidably arrived when the colonies had attained
such strength, including military, that. they were able to defy the
center. And if this happened in a sllccessfully chosen political and
economic situation, then a general crisis ensued and after a stubborn,
often bloody struggle, the empires wcre brokcn apart.
So it happened in different centuries with the Osman, British,
Spanish, French and Russian empires. The Soviet Union even
collapsed in OUI Lime for the very same re..lsons.
What else happened? Euphoria usually gushed over the former
colonies. People were convinced that now they would be just as
rich and strong as their former mast.crs. Striving ever faster to
rid themselves of the "foreign influence", t.hey urgently restored
their customs, rites and rituals and called the old gods to service.
And, naturally, they proclaimed full independence from the
v'1l1quished mother country.
However, univcrsal welfare did not cnsue. What is more, the
countries were plunged into protracted economic and political
chaos. It turned out that no economic independence had come
about: the economic connections with the fonner imperial centcr
were too strong. And there wasn't complete spiritual freedom

352
because those notions about the world and man reigned in the
souls of the people that were developed in the common imperial
space. These countries embarked on the path of independence with
the full burden of life from which no one ever and anywhere has
succeeded in being free. And the slow improvement of life ensued
only after the passage of decades, and even centuries.
After the collapse of the first empire in the world, the local
dictators above all began a redistribution of property. Both new
rulers and those of the old wbo had changed their religious and
ideological orientation on time and were able to stay in power
took part in it. The temptation was too great to take everything
for oneself that very recently had belonged to the mother country
and her organizations.
If one is to trace the traditional English history, King Henry
VIII implemented reforms on the redistribution of property in
1536-t539, having taken for his private property the best lands,
including also the monasteries, having closed more than 500 of
them and having rewritten their assets for himself. And in 1559,
Henry's daughter Queen Elizabeth I made the English church part
of the government. The land which, did not belong to the Queen,
was divided into parishes, in which all residents of a Village or
concrete church district were registered. The residents of an
English parish did not have the right to leave it without permission
of the authorities after 1563.
The redistribution of property was accompanied by massive
repressions. During the time of Henry VIII alone more than 7,000
people were put to death and more than 10,000 homeless wandered
along the roads. Queen Mary also was ruthless. She went down in
history as "Bloody Mary".
In those same years, the Russian tsar, Ivan Jll, according to thc
evidence of the traditional history, also unfolded massive reprcssions
and redistribution of property. The tsar became a private person
legally, seized the best, including also the church lands as his private
property, and made the rest landed property under Boyar control.
The land, thus, was divided into "private" • state and "public" • the
landed. Only it is not understood why Ivan III at the same time
did not change his title, which is evidencc of his former subordinate
position in the empire. You see, the word "tsar" is of Judaic origin
and means "deputy". Petcr the Great did this two centuries later.

353
He designated himself the Russian emperor.
At the same time, the privileges of the Hanseatic League, the
most powerful merchant association of the former empire, were
abolished. Thus, for the first time barriers were placed at the state
level to the activity of a foreign merchant organization, the menacing
competitor of its own merchants. A practice used by all countries
of the world through today.
Simultaneously with the redistribution of property an
uninterrupted struggle between the new rulers and the last proteges
of the empire which had gone into non~existence was taking place.
In 1589, the "Valois" (that is, of the Great) Dynasty ended with
the murder of Henry III in France, and in 1603, with the death of
the childless Elizabeth I, the granddaughter of Henry Tudor, the
dynasty of the "Tudors" in England. In 1605, the dynasty of the
"Ruriks" ended in Russia - with the death of Boris Godunov.
The arrival of new sovereigns intensified the fight for the
empire's legacy. It was a question not only of the lands - the main
wealth of the states - but also of the organizations which had
previously been of a pan-imperial nature. In particular, about the
monastic communities - those of the orders which, even before,
were not subordinate to the local authorities. They possessed
colossal riches, connections and their own military force. Not one
European sovereign was able to feel confident on the throne while
these orders existed. They served as graphic denial of any national
idea that undermined the formation process of national states.
They had to be destroyed at any cost.
The fate of the Knights Templar is characteristic.
The traditional history thinks that the order was created at
the start of the 12th century under the control of and with the
blessing of the Roman papacy. An ordinary phantom which was
born at a time when the papacy, haVing extended the existence of
Christianity by a thousand odd years, was imbuing the emptiness
which had been created in the chronology with a long list of
contrived popes, organizations and events.
There still was no Catholicism, nor Orthodoxy, nor
Mohammedanism in the times of the creation of the orders. The
empire's monotheism had dominated. And the order of the Temple,
or Templars, served its purposes.
The order was purely monastic in and of itself. Its members

354
took vows of obedience (submission), poverty and celibacy. The
Templars' charter, as it is maintained, was developed by Saint
Bernard himself and legalized at the Church Council in the French
city of Troyes supposedly by Roman Pope Eugene III in 1128.
A knight, entering the Knights Templar order, disavowed not
only all worldly life, but also relatives. Only bread and water
were supposed to serve as his food. Meat, milk, vegetables, fruits
and wine were prohibited. Clothing was only the simplest. If
gold or silver articles, or money, were discovered after the monk-
knight's dealh in his things, then he lost the right to burial in
consacrated ground (<I cemetery), and if it was discovered right
after the burial, then the body had to be removed from the grave
and thrown to the mercy of the dogs.
A white cloak or gown for the knights and brown for the
sergeants with a scarlet eight~pointed cross (known as the "Maltese
Cross") served as distinguishing signs of the Knights Templar
Order. The Templars had a war-cry: "Beauseant" and a flag
(standard) - a black and white stri p with the motto "Non nobis
Domine." These are the starting words of the 1st verse of Psalm
115: "Non nobis Domine, non nobis, sed nomini tuo da gloriam ...
- "Not to us, 0 Lord, not to us, but to thy name give glory". The
order's coat-of-arms was a representation of two knights riding on
the same horse (a symbol of the Templars' poverty).

~_,,.i\ •
, ,c..... "•
.,
I,
•• • "t
t 1, ,1 •

, '\ f '
•
• • •
•

Seal oIlhs order - two Mights OIl ooe hotse.

The oath of an order member is curious. There are such

phrases in it:
"I, a krlight of the order, swear to my lord and master, and to
the successor of the prince of the apostle and to his heirs in constant

355
loyalty lind obedience . .. I promise also to obey the grand master
of lhe order and to be dutiful as the orders dema"d of it AlllllY
time of day lind night, when the order is received. I vow to do
bllltle ag(liflSl false kings and princes... "As we sec, the lords and
masters were not some kind of kings or princes, they were supposed,
on the other hand, to punish them in case of disobedience, and not
the grand master, who clearly was in the latter roles, hut the "prince
of the apostles" and his heirs. That is, the emperor. There is no
other candidate for this post. As there is not a single word about
Jesus Christ in the oath. He still had not become the Messiah.
There are moments in the history of the Templars which are
inexplicable from the traditional point of view. Authors of writings
about the order recognize them:
"It is now difficult to explain how the Knights Templar gained
for themselves so very qUickly huge popularity; in fact, over several
years more than 300 knights alone were counted in its numbers,
among whom a great number of princes and dukes were counted"
("World History").
From the point of view of the new chronology, there are no
difficulties observed here. Any local ruler wished to show to the
emperor that he was subject to hilll body and soul and considered
it an honor to be accepted into the imperial order. And as concerning
wealth, it was simply expected that he should not flaunt it. That is
how the princes and dukes joined.
Although the order was proclaimed to he destitute, its wealth
grew SWiftly. Only two years after its founding it already had at
its disposal vast land holdings in England, Scotland, Flanders,
Spain and Portugal. As the researchers note", ...a large part of
southern France consisted of the contiguous holdings of the Knights
Templar Order. It became a huge land holder in only to years in
other countries, too : in Italy, Austria, Germany and Hungary.
However, the trdditional historians recognize, "the active usurious
actiVity, in fact the cre....tion of Europe's bonking system, was the tniC
h.:'1SiS of the Order's riches".
Another primary arctivity of the Order was diplomacy. This
was veiled by a curtain of secrecy, however, as is due diplomacy.
It is known only that knight-commanders of the Tcmplars were in
nine provinces of the West and that, besides the knight commanders,
there also existed custodians and inspectors. These were known

356
collectively as "visitors", that is, those who arrive from somewhere
on a visit, as inspectors. It is known that attached to each royal
court, church episcopacy and duke's home - Le., everywhere where,

Fonress wallin Akka.

in one way or another, the empire's centralized policy had a hand

in local affairs, there was a special trio of Templars. These trios
were attached to the courts of France and England, Flanders and
Hungary, the Aquitaine and Portugal. No general political document,
using the language of a modern jurisdiction, could be initialed
without the signatures of the Templars. Without this, it was
considered a frivolous sli p of paper.
In science they patronized geodesy, cartography, medicine, and
alchemy, hence all the myths of the papacy about their connections
with the deviL In their hands, in their homes, around the world,
brotherhoods of Freemasons became firmly established - architects
of Gothic style, guilds of road builders, of temples, and of castles
and fortresses, regarding the impregnability of which there were
legends. In particular, they built Saint Jean D'Acre (Acre, Akko),
Gaza, Tortosa, Beth Jibelan and Montsegur. The guild of Freemasons
- the "half brothers" of the Templars - erected the Petit·pont
and the Louvre in Paris and the Temple in London.
They had their own dockyards, fleets and ports. The famous
L1. Rochelle is a Templars' port. Vasco da Gama was a knight of the
Order of Christ (a Portugucsc branch of the Knights of the Temple),
and Prince Henry the Navigator - his Grand Master. The Portuguese
prince himself never sailed, but founded an observatory and a seafaring
school in Sagres using the funds of the Order of Christ and he

357
promoted the development of shi pbuilding in PortugaL On his
initiative were equi pped the ocean expeditions of Goncalo Cabral,
Alvise de Cadamosto and others who discovered the Azores Islands,
Cape Verde, Bijagos and surveyed the Senegal and Gambia Rivers.
The caravels of Christopher Columbus, the Santa Maria, Pinta and
the Nina, crossed the Atlantic Ocean and reached the island of San
Salvador in the Bahaman Archi pelago under the flags of the order. The
great discoverer of America himself was married to Feli pa Perestrello
y Moniz, the daughter of an associate of Henry the Navigator, a knight
of the Order of Christ, who gave him his nautical and pilot charts.
The impetuous economic activity of the Templars is ful1y
explicable. Financiers invested money all the time into those
branches of the economy that promised high profits. Seafaring
just then was the most alluring sphere for the investment of capital.
The Templars had a standing force - a quick reaction force 4

numbering up to 15,000 men. They had their own courts and

their own internal security service. And though the empire fell to
pieces, the Order as before was above the states, not recognizing
over itself, in the absence of the emperor, anyone, except God.
A conflict between the order and the English Henry III as
early as those times was typical when the empire existed. Brought
to a rage by the self-will of the Templars, the king ventured to dare
them and threatened the confiscation of property:
"You, Templars... have so many liberties and charters that
your enormous possessions make you rave with pride and
haughtiness. What was imprudently given must bc, therefore,
prudently be revoked, and what was inconsiderately bestowcd
must be considerately re-called".
The Grand Master's scathing retort: "What sayest thou,
King? Far be it that thy mouth should utter so disagreeable and
°
silly a word. So long as thou dost exercise justice thou wilt reign;
but if thou infringe it, thou wilt cease to be a King".
And the Master got away with it: Henry III was afraid to
step forward against the emperor and his servants. And other
local sovereigns endured the impudence of the order. The
traditional history explains this by the fact that they were afraid
of the Roman papacy's rage, supposedly the organizer and patron of
the orders:

358
 ... "Hence was the autonomism of the knightly orders so great,
and their full independence nol only from secular monarchs, but
even from the clergy".
An explanation, in our view, completely unconvincing. It was
contrived centuries later for increasing the authority of the Catholic
Church. Even if one admits for a minute that the papacy already
existed in the t2-14th centuries, the monarchs were not afraid of it.
There were instances when kings ordered popes about and exiled
them wherever they wanted. There were times when they publicly
called the Catholic Church a harlot, and Rome bore their spittle and
their taunts in silence, possessing neither strell&Jlh nor authority to
retaliate.
And what question could there be about their authority if they
still remembered who such pontiff-priests are who oversaw the

PtiJip IV 8e3UW

calendar, legal procedure and private law! By the way, the fact that
the priest "pontiffs" managed private law stood them in good stead.
They controlled the common property of the Byzantine Empire.
And after its dissolution they began to seize this property, calling it
"God's", the Chief Pontiff· in the first place.
French King Philip IV the Fair first resolved to encroach
upon their wealth.
One can understand him: he experienced a keen need for
money and sat with difficulty on the throne because of steady

359
financial difficulties with French merchants, nobles and even the
common people. At first the King offered himself as one of the
leaders of the order. The Grand Master Jacques de Malay
understood that Philip aspired to his position,and he refused the
king. Then Phili p offered to move the Order's residence from
Cyprus to Paris, giving reasons for this supposedly as plans for
uniting the Hospitallers with the Templars.
The Master could no longer resist here. The Order of the
Hospitallers also possessed great riches, and the desire to get his
hands on them was great. Keeping its primary residence in Cyprus,
de Malay built a new Temple in Paris in the form of a powerful
fortified structure. Just in case. But the fortifications did not
help him. He did not know that a plan already had been hatched
and agreed to with England, Italy, Germany, Cyprus and other
countries for the simultaneous arrest of all Templars.
At the beginning of October (supposedly in 1307), the king's
sealed orders were distributed to all the cities of France with the
note "Unseal on 12 October." On 13 October of that same year,
nearly 5,000 Templars were arrested simultaneously throughout all
France and put into prisons. The same thing happened in the other
countries, although not immediately and not so decisively. The
brilliantly conceived police operation was completely sllccessful.
Inasmuch as Philip was not able to directly admit that he needed
the money, the supreme leaders of the order were accused of heresy
and sacrileges. The accusation that not the Christian religion, but a
mix of Islam and idolatry predominated in the order became the most
important accusation. That is what the historians of the papacy write.
In our view, this assertion does not stand up to examination.
One may .accuse of idolatry whomever he likes, but one has to take into
account here that Mohammedanism became a religion in the modern
sense of the word not earlier than 1603, when Sultan Nunet I made it
the Osman (the former Byzantine) empire's state religion (or tlte (irst
time. Only then did the crescent with the star become, for the first
time, the Moslem symbol. Previously it had been considered
exclusively an imperial military sign. For this very reason some ancient
European and Russian churches even today crown their spires
simultaneously with crosses and crescents, confusing faithful Christians
who do not know the history of the religious symbols.
The accusation of the Tcmplars practicing Islam occurred only
360
after the fragmentation of the former monotheism into different
faiths happened and a bloody war erupted for the control of various
spheres of influence. At this point the writers of the past considered
that to be a Moslem meant to be a criminal. This serves as one
more piece of evidence to the contention that the overthrow of the
Templars happened much later.
One can more likely believe the other accusation: the Templars
spit on the cross and trampled it under their feet. A fully serious
proposal if one takes into account that they were monotheists, and
the cross as a symbol arose many centuries before Christianity and
Jesus Christ. Even the pagans of Egypt worshi pped it as a sign of
the Sun God Ra, as did the Cathars and the Bogomils. The Templars

Jacques de MQlay Grand Masler

thus had expressed their relationshi p to paganism.

The well-known English researcher of the history of the
medieval knightly orders, Ernie Bradford, wrote:
"The accusations were true or false which were advanced against
the Templars, and it became subsequently an object of long
361
diScussions. However. this question could nol be resolved
unambiguously, inasmuch as it was impossible to believe a confession
which was extorted under torture, the more SO that the accusers of
the Tcmplars. as was widely known. were directly interested in the
co,lfiscatiotl of their lands and money".

The burning 01 hetBlics II ,fig $'#'

By the way, an intense disappointment awaitl.'d King Phili p: all

the Templars' property. with the exception of the lands in C<lStille.
Arat,'OI1. Portugal and [\'Iajorca, were given to the Order of Saint John.
The Templars one and all were put to death in France. Their
grand masters lost their lives at ..t il extremely notable place:
... "on 18 March 1314, Jacques de Malay and Geoffroi de Charney
were burnt alive in Paris, on lie des jauiolLf (Hebrew Island)" ...
Philip the Fair burned them there in the very center of the
capital where the especially honored and protected financiers and
collectors of taxes, confederates and coreligionists of the Templars
lived and worked. A new time had come, and it was necessary to
show the former imperial "slaves of the treasury", who now
controlled the country's fate. A wnve of pogroms and persecutions
of monotheists swept in at the same time. The king considered
that if they were indeed to plunder, then it was to be
ind iscrim inatcly.
The fnte of the other imperial orders was no less sad, although
they were not eliminated as qUickly or thoroughly. The point is that,
for example. the "Brotherhood of the Teutonic Knights of the Blessed
362
Virgin" operated on the outskirts of the former empire, and this
suited everyone for a long time. In imperial times, the Brotherhood
had started its activities fully peacefully - establishing hospitals
and hospitable homes. However, the Teutons soon changed
specialization. They set about opening up the lands of Lithuania,
Poland and the empire's overseas territories.

What was Prussia like before the arrival there of the Teutons?
It was, in a sense, a military confederation of 11 warlike tribes.
The Zhmud, Lithuanians, Yatvyags, Prussiaos and many others were
not meek lambs, as the traditional historians write, 00 whom the
Teutonic "wolves" cruelly descended like a bolt from the blue.
They lived by raiding their neighbors, practiced human sacrifice
and prayed to pagan gods. The imperial monastic community also
took after them for the glory of monotheism.
They acted ixIth with force and with persuasion. The Teutonic
chronicler Peter von Dusburg wrote about it thus: "Who rof the
PrussiansJ would not have turned ... having abandoned idolatry, the
brothers indulgently turning with him, and that's how it is. If he is
distinguished and comes from a family of nobles, then lands are
given to him for free possession and in such quantity that he can live
as would befit his position... "As a result, a layer of Prussian "free", or
"unrestricted", freeholders, who were obliged to perform still too
military service and, by the way, they proved to be fine soldiers. The
principle was fulfilled: "Let the Prussians remain Prussians".
However, it is not realistic to imagine that the Teutons were

363
such high-minded knights at all times and in all places. Such
personages live only in novels. The Teutons had a reputation for
the bloody slaughter of the peaceful populations, common robbery,
theft and crimes against their own comrades. As a result, a "Thema"
was born in the depths of the Teutonic brotherhood ~ the awful
secret police, the prototype of all secret police of the world, "the
cloak and dagger knights". Merely mentioning the Thema instilled
horror into peasants and burgers, knights and the church hierarch,
even kings and princes in all corners of the land. The Thema, in
essence, was the original "eyes and cars" of the state and it raged
over the empire's territory, sowing fear and death among its
subjects. The purpose was to keep the population obedient; the
method was terror. (V. Sinelnikov).
According to the traditional history, the Teutonic Order outlived
the Templars for a short while. It supposedly ceased its existence in
1410, after defeat in the battle of Grunwald from a united Polish-
Lithuanian-Russian force under the command of the Polish King
Vladislav II Jogailo. It was not so. It exists even today, having
become, by the way, completely peaceful and god-fearing. Not even
a trace remains of its former ideology. And it involved the oneness
of the Tcutons' mission and acquittal of any crimes in the name of
the fulfillment of this mission and absolution without repentance.
It is not by accident that we have begun to speak of the Teutonic
ideology. The idea of unity was so alluring that another monastic
order took up the mission of the Teutons. As the traditional history
maintains, it was founded in Paris in 1534 by the Spanish nobleman,
IgnatiUS of Loyola (1491·1556.) Its proper name is Societas Jesu
(The Society of Jesus), that is, the Society of Jesuits.
The new order was distinguished primarily from the former
imperial orders by the fact that it was an arm of the Roman Catholic
Church. This happened for many reasons, both objective and
subjective.
We shall once more recall the situation after the dissolution of the
empire. The milit.1.ry and political defeat of the center was, at the
same time, its defeat in the ideological sphere - its religious and spiritual
formulations. The former provinces at once proclaimed themselves
independent in every sense of the word. Included, naturally, was the
religious sense. They were not able to turn away from monotheism

364
entirely: several generations of people had grown up worshi pping
the one God. But given the intrinsic conservatism of peasant culture,
changes of this magnitude are necessarily very gradual ones. The
replacement of the old with the new requires continuous pressure
over the course of many centuries to bring about; even then, a limit is
reached at which people balk. The old ways and patterns of belief,
although weakening, had certainly not disappeared entirely: people
still derived much of their identity from their ancestral customs and
the old beliefs which animated these.
At this point, and for this reason, there was a violent resurgence
of pagan rites, rituals and customs throughout the territories of the
former empire. This is noted by all historians. True, tbey manage
to find explanations for this. In one case, a reaction against the
depravity of one or another of the popes; in another, the
ungovernability of the rabble, which for some reason collectively
vented its base instincts. And so on. And when sllch contrived
"explanations" seem too far~fetched for even traditional historians
themselves. the most conscientious of them are at a loss - bon~tly
acknowledging that they have no idea how such pagan figures as
Bacchus and J-Ieracles came to be included in the pantheon of
Christian saints in the mediaeval epoch.
But inasmuch as it is impossible for them to leave these facts
without explanation, other historians think that errors have crept
into the chronicles and other documents which have come down to
us. The chronicles were in error. With this assumption the modern
specialists, comparing different sources, find their opportunity to set
things to rights. This arrogant and peremptory approach to the
documents is encountered quite often in traditional hjstory. Anything
in the medieval authors which contra(Jjcts the established views elicits
the extensive commentaries of extremely wise learned men, the sense
of which is simple and categorical. "The author is wrong!"
Well, and if he is not in error? If he wrote about what he
himself saw? How would matters stand then?
From a failure to consider the conditions in which the new
religions arose during that epoch, it is hopelessly difficult to
comprehend from whence that very Bacchus appeared, only to vanish
when, finally, modern Christianity was crystallizing into a slngle whole.
Abundant evidence of the "recoil" of paganism after the dissolution

365
of the empire is preserved in documents, in the accounts written by
travelers, and in the various writings of the Christian theologians
who contended later with various sects which, in the new historic
conditions, had remained faithful to a mLxture of the old Christian
and pre-Christian customs.
A mixture of pagan and Christian faiths is obscrv<.-'d, for example,
in Egypt. The tomb of Ramscs IV, in contrast to many other tombs
of the Valley of the Kings, was found not to be walled up by European
explorers. In which connection, it had been long since opened for
visitation. As it turns out, a "small Christian community, which
lived in the Valley, used it as a church". (Anatoly Fomenko).
One would wonder what possible sort of relationship the
V'llley of the Kings could have had with Christianity. Especially
with the tomb of Ramses IV who, as the Egyptologists assure us,
I

lived in distant antiquity.

Nonetheless, clear evidence that Christians really did pray in
the tomb of Ramses IV have survived into our own time. All of the
tomb's walls are covered with Christian inscri ptions in Greek.
Two Christian saints are depicted on the church's vestments. The
most extensive Greek drawings are located directly next to the
entrance into the tomb itself· obviously so that people could see
them from the outside.
It turns out that a huge temple, located in the very center of
Luxor - ancient Thebes - also included a Christian church at some
time. The Temple of Luxor is a typical ancient Egyptian structure.
Its walls are covered with a multitude of hieroglyphs and Egyptian
images. Nonetheless, a Christian church in the Greek style has been
preserved in its interior down to today with an altar and the remains
of Christian frescos, executed on top of the Egyptian images.
In a room behind the altar of this Christian church - or, perhaps,
.it its altar itself --a depiction of a pharaoh by the llame of
ALEXANDER was discovered on the wall. This is precisely the
name that is inscribed in its cartouche. It is locally considered that
this is Alexander the Great, by whose order this room was built. I.e.,
Alexander the Great, having arrived in Luxor, ordered the addition
of this room for the Christian church to the Temple of Luxor and the
decoration of its altar with his own image in the form of a pharaoh.

366
From the point of view of the Scaligerian chronology, this is
inconceivable. But from the point of view of the new chronology,
this may well have occurred in the 15th century A.D.
There is not only a Christian church at the Temple of Luxor, but
also a J\1oslem mosque. The features of that time, when the world's
religions only had begun Lo be divided, sprouting from a common
monotheism for them, show through visibly.
Speaking of paganism, Christian theologians single out such
features of it as the sacred mysteries with their ordainings
(initiations), sacrifices and flagellations, temple prostitution, dancing,
jumping and spinning, which enabled the achievement of special,
ecstatic conditions interpreted as a wearing down of the "soul".
After thousands of years the pagans had developed complex rituals:
for the people - processions with dancing, jumping and torches; for
the elite - the mysteries, into which only the elect were admitted.
But you see, all of this was peculiar to Christianity in the
Middle Ages! A mass of evidence points to the fact that the church
hierarchy set records in the scale of its orgies, that the mysteries of
the Messiah's life were played out in the streets and the squares, and
that the processions with their dancing and torches aroused people
to a frenzy of self~nagellation. Unadulterated paganism roared across
the landscape of Europe, about which we will speak in greater detail
in the chapter devoted to Jesus Christ.
It is impossible to escape these facts. Therefore the theologians,
defending their modern Christianity against any kind of connection
with paganism with every resource at their command, promoted
the notion of the existence of an olltwardly professed Christianity
which got along amiably with the accustomed "old" rituals and
"national" holidays. (S. Slwrov "Pagan Roots of European
Sectarianism" ).
An external shell of Christianity thus supposedly contained
the satanic essence of the mysteries and other attributes of the old
faiths within it. That is, it was necessary to have recourse to evil
for an explanation of what was occurring. Otherwise, it did not
add up for the theologians.
It is worth noting that even today's Christian rituals have
preserved traces of the influence of paganism. But there is not one
word about that in the theological works.

367
 Human sacrifice, the most lurid feature of paganism, is not SO
clear-cut here as it once may have seemed. The official pronouncements
of all worldwide religions unambiguously condemn this awful method
of communicating with God. But did (and do) the parishioners
themselves always eschew it? However sad it may be, even today this
manifestation of paganism persists. I-Jere arc some facts.
In 1463, at Nogat (Europe), when it was necessary to fix a
failing dam, the pe'lsants got a destitute tramp dead drunk and
buried him alive there, following advice to place a living man into
the dam "for strength". Exactly the same kind of rituals were
observed in Germany in the following two centuries. They buried
people in the ground so that they "held" the corners of buildings.
In the Middle Ages trials took place in Europe more than once
in which infants figured who were murdered during so-called
"black masses". For example, a court trying Gilles de Rais, who
supposedly had used an unbaptized infant for obtaining alchemic
gold from the devil, and trying Urban Grandier, who was accused
of murdering a child in Orleans in 1631. But if the accusations
against de Rais and Grandier evoke the great skepticism of historians,
then in the case with tbe wife of a Parisian jeweler, Marguerite
Monvoisin, nee Deshayes, the evidence of the crime seems
indisputable. You see, in the garden of her home in Saint Germain
the remains of two and a half thousand slaughtered children and
undeveloped embryos were found by investigators.
Monvoisin and her accomplices had arranged black masses under
the leadcrshi p of Abbot Guibourg,using the neglected Saint Marseilles
church for it. A combination of a Catholic mass and elements of
ancient pagan cults, sorcery and sexual orgies were combined in the
service ritual.
James Fraser says in "The Colden Bough" that black masses,
magic and sacrifices were spread among the uneducated French
peasantry even still in the 19th century. "Gascon peasants believe",
notes Fraser, "that to revenge themselves on their enemies bad
men will sometimes induce a priest to say a mass called the Mass
of Saint Secaire",
Recently in Spain, in Torrelodenes and £1 Escorial, towns not far
from Madrid, graves were desecrated and human bones were discovcrOO.
In the police report it empbasizes that "there is almost full confidence

368
that a child was St'\crificed". A certaiJl Maria Mieres reported that she
had obser.red the ritual when "a child of approximately two yem'S of age
was murdered in fulfillment of the demands of witchcraft".
According to reports from sources connected to Interpol, in
1989 and the first months of 1990, more than a hundred murders
were committed by sects in Western Europe, the United States
and Canada. In these there is direct evidence of premeditated
murder with cruel tortures.
Such are the distant echoes of that time when a wave of old
beliefs incongruously mixed with the imperial monotheism swept
over the provinces of the former empire.
It was in these conditions the order of Jesuits appeared. This
was officially established by Pope Paul III in 1540. The convocation
of the famous Council of Trent is connected with it. It was a time
of furious struggle against written heresy which generated an
infamous literary auto-da-fe and the first "Index of Forbidden
Books" .
We do not doubt the date claimed for the establishment of the
Jesuit order. It makes no difference either way. In principle,another
thing is important: the Jesuits did not appear out of nowhere.
Such an organization had existed as early as the empire period and
was called catholic, which meant "universal". A first and second
order of Jesuits figures even in the official history. And the first
carried out the same functions as its successor, only it struggled not
against Christian heresy, but with paganism. We find traces of its
stormy activity in the evidence of the 14th century.
Here is a fragment of a work by Meister Eckhart, one of the
Catholic theologians;
"Margaret Porete was put to the torch as a heretic in Paris on
31 May, 1310. Her book "The Mirror of Simple Souls" was burnt
publicly beforehand.
Meister Eckhart knew about this for certain, for you see he
jived in the neighborhood of William of Paris, the general inquisitor
who headed the trial.
Otto Steiger and Gunnar Heinsohn in the hook "Die
Vernichtung der wei sen Frauen" call the time between 1360 and
1700 the epoch of the Inquisition's greatest activity. Heretics were
subjected to universal abuse. They were scaled alive in walls,

369
sentenced to galley slavery and burnt· not only living people, but
also the remains of those long dead.
Members of this order carried out this same work for centuries.
Here a substitution of this sinister society's goals occurred after the
fall of t.he empire, unnoticed by the illiterate parishioners: rarael was
replaced by Catholicism. Everything else remained the S<'lllle: imperial.
First of all is the suprastate status of the order. This was copied
from ot.her imperial orders of the Templar type. The Roman papacy
strove for worldwide religious domination just as the empire had
before it. Therefore, it was adopting methods already tested and
proven effective. The strict disci pline already familiar to us, the
absolut.e submission to the order's direction and obedience to the
Pope of Rome distinguishes the Jesuits as it did the Templars before
them. In both cases, the order was removed from the jurisdiction of
the local church hierarchs - another feature of the imperial orders.
The church, being tom to pieces by internal contradictions and
attacked by the Refonnation, entrusted to the order the creation of a
power system of theological and apologetic defense, and in a shOlt
time the Society of Jesus indeed became a powerful religious, ideologiC<'lI,
political and economic force. So powerful did it become that Pope
Clement XIV (1769-1774), under pressure from the royal courts of
Portugal, Spain and France, dissolved the order in 1773. However,
almost half a century later, when Europe had somewhat forgotten the
activities of the Jesuits, Pope Pius VIl, reestablished them.
It is interesting that in the bull "Dominus ac Redemptor",
Clement XIV accused the Jesuits of every sort of crime against the
church. And not one word about crimes against the people!
This barbarism continued in France until 1772 and in Switzerland
until 1782. The Inquisition operated in Italy until 1859. The last
sentence to galley slavery was imposed on a married couple in 1852.
After that, the order reduced its militancy significantly: times
had changed somewhat· now it concentrated on religious
propaganda. As the magazine "La Civilta Cattolica" reports, at
present it counts nearly 35,000 members and has 33 of its own
universities and 200 schools of various types. The struggle for
people's souls continues.
Like the imperial orders which preceded it, the Jesuits devoted,

370
and devote to this day, significant attention to religious education.
It even is called an "order of learned men". It has organized
theological seminaries, schools, and universities, having become an
actual monopolist in the area of enlightenment and education in
Catholic countries.
Even in this, the original experience and foundations of the
monotheists was Widely and comprehensively copied. We already
have spoken about the great significance which the imperial
monotheists imparted to education. They were first to create
theological seminaries and universities in the 13-14th centuries.
The medieval universities originated as meetings of monotheists,
that is as meetings at which sermons used for religious training
were given. In a similar way the uniform interpretation of ideas
was introduced, helping to eliminate alternative construals of
orthodox postu lates.
Such an approach to the teaching of the young was extremely
valuable. And the Jesuits adopted it into their arsenal. But for a
start they had rid themselves of the remnants of Judaism.
Historians of the papacy maintain that as early as 1239, Nicholas
Donio, a French eliminator of Jews, denounced the Talmud to
Pope Gregory IX. And as early as 1240, a trial began in Paris
against the book before a court of bishops and Dominicans. The
Talmud was recognized as "vile unto God", and they decreed the
burning of it. Which is what happened. Twenty-four cartloads of
Talmudic books were burnt in Paris in 1242.
One could check the chronology cited if not for one
circumstance: the first strictly Catholic university was founded
only in 1508 in Madrid (Spain).
Louis the saint, worried that the Talmud and similar writings
"vile to God" were haVing an effect, ordered that all such be seized
and burnt throught all of France. The losses inflicted by this first,
but not only literary auto-da-fe in history, were incalculable.
Documents which would have helped recreate the true history of
Western civilization disappeared forever.
At the same time, the universities were purged of suspect teachers
and students. This led to overt unrest and disorders, in which
several students perished. Therefore, they closed the University
of Paris altogether for six years. And only when passions had

371
calmed a bit, did they reopen it again.
Evidence of the closest links between Jewish learned men and
theologians with the first European universities was preserved in
the biographies of the greatest learned men of that time. In p31ticular.
Roger Bacon, a graduate of and subsequently an instructor at Oxford
was involved with Jews who were teaching their own progeny in
Hebrew and who helped him translate Hebrew texts. He interceded
with the pope in regard to the study of Hebrew. Moreover, he
criticized the pope, the clergy and the scholastics.
Roger Bacon was cast into prison for unsanctioned speeches in
1277. So it says in a French chronicle of the 14th century. The
traditional historians write that he "did not exercise any influence
in his own day, and only in the 16th century was he discovered
anew". All things considered, he probably lived in the 16th century.
England would not forget a learned man of such stature for three
centuries.
In the second half of the 16th century, the universities of Krakow
and Vienna become religious centers, and universities of the religious
persuasion were founded in the cities of Leyden (1575, Germany),
Vilnius (Poland-Lithuania, 1579) and Edinburgh (Scotland, 1583.)
One of the key terms in any university· "professor" . appeared for
the first time in the 16th century, at Oxford. It is typical that this
word means in Latin· "confessor of the faith." So, " professors" are
all invention of the I6·17th centuries.
Its Christian enemies used the same techniques and methods
in the scuffle with the Roman papacy for spheres of influence.
When arguments arose at the end of the 16th century about the
true faith, a group of universities opposed to Rome appe'lfed. They
were opened in Prague, Krakow, Vienna, Heidelberg, Cologne and
also in cities of northern Italy. This group constituted secular
institutions, which subsequently became centers of Protestantism".
It might be noted in passing that these are located in Eastern
and Central, but not in Western Europe. Religious reformer and
founder of Lutheranism, Martin Luther, worked at the University
of Wittenberg (1517). There he posted his 95 theses against
indulgences which rejected the basic doctrines of Catholicism.
In parallel with the universities, not only in Western but also
in Eastern Europe, parochial brotherhoods arose, for example, in Lvov

372
(1439) and Vii no (1458.) At the end of the 16th - start of the 17th
centu.ries, these associations of professionals gradually changed into
religious-orthoclox brotherhoods: Lvov (1586), Kiev (1615), Lutsk
(1624) and the like. Orthodox schools and printing houses were
opening during U1C time of the brotherhoods. The artificial Church
Slavonic language and writing in it, which crowded out the civil
alphabet, was introduced through them. (Yaroslav Kesler).
Thus, in the middle of the 17th century, the basic varieties of
Christianity - Roman Catholicism, Protestantism and Orthodoxy
- were formed and established in their own spheres.
A similar process had occurred in the Osman Empire. There,
through the rnadrasah, modem Mohanunedanism gradually took shape,
becoming the official religion of Turkey only in 1603. The origin of
Mohammedanism itself, apparently, is connected with the struggle
of the brothers Musa (Moses) and Mehmed (Mohammed), between
whom Tamerlane divided the legacy of the Turkish Sultan Bayazid.
In 1413. Musa was defeated and taken prisoner, Mehmed becoming
Sultan in 1413-1421. Thus the beginning of Islam dates not to 622,
but approximately 800 years later. The word "Koran" appears in the
English language only in the 17th century although, according to
English history, Arabs had supposedly been familiar before this in
England for a whole millennium, since Arabic coins circulated in
England even in Anglo-Saxon times.
Only at the end of the 17th century, in the face of the pressure
exerted by the national religions that were gathering strength
everywhere, was modern Judaism formed· without a geographic
localization, for by this time no place remained in the division of
the world.
We shall emphasize again: the division of the Byzantine
monotheism into several faiths was inevitable. The creation of
independent states is impossible without a bright idea which unites
people on the basis of the princi pie, "You and I are of the same
blood". And this idea became popular thanks to the fact that, in
particular in the Middle Ages, the economic situation had changed.
The development of technology led to the appearance of surplus
production. Capitalistic relationshi ps began to develop along with
the slavery, feudalism and communal order which was the norm
everywhere.

373
 However, anywhere there is a market, there is also competition.
Not only economic, but also ideological. States began to defend
their own producers and their own merchants, and precisely so
also did the churches come to the defense of their own
coreligionists. As is the case in the workforce indoctrination of
competing firms, they impressed on their adherents that only th~y
worshipped God properly. All the others did this incorrectly
and would therefore be denied Paradise in the next world.
The co-existence of competing churches gives away completely
the marketing nature of the church institutions, which were, in a
sense, brokerage offices. The papal sale of indulgences, holy relics
and simony (the trade in offices in the 15-17th centuries) already
were dealer services. (Yaroslav Kesler).
The formation of different faiths based on monotheism led to
the creation of different holy books. In the second half of the 15th
century the views of Byzantine monotheists received the name
.Old Testament.,and the Bible as such was formed toward the
end of the 16th century (the word Bible itself appeared only in
the 16th century);it was published for the first time in the entirety
only toward the end of the 16th century in Geneva.
In the 2004 year newspapers wrote:
Four hundred years ago today,the king commanded ,and the
a landmark translation of Bible became the standard against which
all other bibles compared. On Jan.12,1604,James 1,the
brilliant,contrary,ugly son of Mary,Queen of Scots and successor
to Elizabeth 1,convened a conference at I-Iampton Court to create
an offiCial Bible to be used in all churches of England.1t took
seven years to complete the project. (Torouto star),

374
THE BIRTH
OFGOD INCARNATE CHAPTER EIGHTEEN

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.
The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the
face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of
the waters. And God said, Let there be light. And there was
light. And God saw that the light was good" ...
So begins the Book of Books. The magnificent literary form
of the account, full of inner energy and poetry, is striking. The
Old Testament is the fruit of the inspired creation of the masters
of the pen, behind whom arc years and years of painstaking labor.
For one man, especially for Moses, who wandered almost his whole
life in the desert of Zion, such was not beyond his grasp. By the
way, Judaism maintains that the first five books of the Bible are
only a record of the revelations of God, made by Moses. He did
not add anything on his own behalf, so it was necessary not to
address him with all possible pretenses.
True, it is not understood how Moses was able to spe"lk about
his own death:
"So Moses the servant of the Lord died there in the land of
Moab according to the word of the Lord... Moses was a hundred
and twenty years old when he died" ... (Deuteronomy 34:4,7).
A certain theologian, iwi AI-Balkhi, expressed confusion in this
regard as early as the Middle Ages: the man was not able to describe
how he died and how they interred him! Skepticism shone through
in the arguments of the Jewish theologian Ibn Ezra, of Benedict
Spinoza and of many others both three and four centuries ago. But,
from the religious point of view, there should be no doubt of it:
inasmuch as the author of the Bible is the Most High, there are not
and cannot be any errors and contradictions in it.
The Bible's influence on the spiritual life of Europe is unique.
It is a grandiose attempt to reveal the nature of the universe and
man's place in it. In its own way it answers all the questions
which come to each of us at some time. And therefore, they turn

375
to it. from century to century.
We will not be touching on its religious content. Each man
determines himself what to believe. We will touch only on how
religious faiths have been used and are used for political purposes.
The rise of states on t.he ruins of the empire demanded a new
self-identification. This served as the main stimulus in the creation
of beliefs which differed from imperial monotheism.
Perhaps such an assertion will appear strange. You see, we
have become accustomed to people distinguishing each other by
national affiliation. And the names of states quite often reflect
the names of the so-called title nations, that is, of peoples who
compose thc majority of these states.
But it was by no means always so. Basically, peoplc distinguish
each othcr by belief. It was the main and defining elemcnt of
their self-identification. As long ago as the start of the 20'h century,
only his religious affiliation was noted in the documents of a
subject of the Russian Empire. The national affiliation of the believers
does not playa princi pal role to this day in the world of Islam.
The main thing is, are you a Moslem or not?
In our opinion, after t.he break up of the empire, the origin of
states and churches happened practically simultaneously. At the
samc time, the clergy solved a complex problem. It was necessary
not to allow a return to paganism with its huge pantheon of gods
at any cost: spiritual discord inevitably would lead to a break up
of the states, and at the same time create a religious and pol itical
basis for unification of the subjects which was distinguished from
imperial monotheism.
Herc is what the well known English Historian Robertson-
Smith thought about this more than one hundred years ago:
"Monotheism resulted not from an original religious inclination
of the Semitic soul, but chiefly was a political consequence. His
contemporary, Houston Stewart Chamberlain declared in so many
words: "There exists a prejudice, which issues from the sophistic
schools of Greece, that monot.heism, that is the notion of One God,
should be symptomatic of a higher religion, but this, undoubtedly,
is a rationalistic deduction; arithmetic has nothing in common
with religion: monotheism can signify an exhaustion as well as an
improvement of religious life".
In order to have their own coreligionists, churches began to
create their own religious doctrines. One had to adapt the sacred

376
ideas which already existed to the changed situation, while ridding
oneself, on one hand, of obvious pagan roots and, on the other, of
too close a relationshi p with Judaism. How did this effect the
teaching about God Incarnate? Several sources were merged
together in it originally.
Initially, Christians prayed not to Jesus, but to the Messiah,
and they were, if one is to translate precisely, not Christians, but
Messians. In which connection, the story of Christ the Messiah
subjectively recalls the legend of Prometheus. The idea of a god's
self·sacrifice was spread widely.
However, it remained too general and therefore, too abstract to
be understandable by each and everyone. It had to be filled with
vivid details, which touched the hearts of people who saw around
them only evil and cruelty. Someone concrete had to suffer in
order to redeem t.he sins of this world. And then a version appeared
about a man, who was depressed and humbled the same as everyone,
and at the same time was the earthly incarnation of God.
The researcher Vladimir Ivanov, in our view, rightly thinks
that at the heart of the version lay the story, set forth by Anna
Comnena in 'The Alexiad" - the story of her father, the emperor
Alcxius Comnenus. Here is what she writes:
"For Basil, a monk, IBasil is "King" io Greek and "Governor"
in Hebrew) was very wily in handling the impiety of the Bogomils;
he had twelve disci pies whom hecalled "apostles," and also dragged
about with him some female disci pies, wretched women of loose
habits and thoroughly bad, and be disseminated his wickedness
everywhere.
"The evil attacked many souls like fire, and the Emperor"s
soul could not brook it, so he began investigating the heresy. He
had some of the Bogomi Is brought to the palace and all proclaimed
a certain Basil as the teacher and chief representative of the
Bogomilian heresy.
Of these, one Diblatius was kept in prison, and, as he would
not confess when questioned, he was subjected to torture and then
informed against the man called Basil, and the disci pIes he had
chosen [described subsequently in the Gospels as Judas Iscariot)".
While not retelling all of the text, we shall mention a number of
similar features in the narrations about Basil and about Jesus Christ:
Sanhedrin,
12 apostles,

377
 Magdalene,
The Temple of Solomon and the expulsion by Basil of the
demons from it,
The betrayal of Diblatius - of Judas.
The unthinking Galatians, referred to later as witnesses to the
execution.
The impressment by Alexius Comnenus, as by Pilot, of church
money for sanitation needs,
The shroud of Christ, scorched on the fire,
Basil's profession - physician,
The arrival from Galilee (the territory of modern France),
A miracle before the execution,
An earthquake. (Amw Comnella, "The Alexiad").
Alexius Comnenus, punishing the imposter and false prophet,
wrote the famous inscri ption INRI (Jesus of Nazareth, King of the
Jews) over his head, not yet knowing to what consequences it
might someday lead.
So had the central figure of the new religion appeared, who
did not lose, however, the closest connection the past faiths.
The studies of the American scholar W. Benjamin Smith, "The
Pre-Christian Jesus", and of the Polish researcher Andrzej
Niemojewski, "God Jesus", "Der urchristliche Erdkreis und scin
Mythos" of Samuel Lublinski, the works of the Frenchmen
Couchoud, Moutiet-Rousset and a number of others are considered
the most prominent works regarding these problems. In a sense,
the German historian, Arthur Drews (1865-1935), in a number of
works. the fundamental of which is "The Christ Myth" (1909),
summed up the investigations into this question.
Arthur Drews did not make it his goal to inflict any kind of
blow to religion. On the contrary, he maintained that he was
acting "not only in the interests of historical truth, but also in
the interests of religion, which in the liberal cult of Jesus had
degenerated increasingly into empty service to the hero" (Arthur
Drews, "The Denial of the Historicity of Jesus i'l Past and
Present," 1930, page 92).
While relying on rather numerous investigations about "pre-
Christian Jesuses", Drews approached the question of Christ's
historical existence from the point of view of mythology.
All the New Testament stories about Jesus Christ speak mostly
about a god. As reg.1.rds the Gospel tales about Jesus-the man, then it

378
is, in Drews' opinion, the result of the latest personification of a god,
the cluttering of a myth with imaginary, minimally historic details.
A cult existed not only of a pre-Christian Christ (the anointed
sovereign, the savior), but also of a pre-Christian Jesus, that is, of a
concrete man with such a name. Under these conditions, in the
opinion of Arthur Drews, there was no need for the hisloric existence
of Jesus. The myth about him "in the presence of a favorable historic
climate even without it was spread in the broadest fashion and
gave birth to the new religion". Here "the religious movement,
which already had long existed in the hidden places of the sects
and which now only had appeared on the public stage, blazed up
with a bright name and burst forth" (Arthur Drews, "The Christ
Myth," 1925, page 38). The Christian cult practically coincides
with the Egyptian cult of the goddess Isis. Its worshippers had
their own morning prayers, liturgies and vespers, which strikingly
recall C.\tholic and Orthodox services. Historians describe
drawings from the walls of temples:
... "The resurrection of Osiris from the dead after his stay of
three days in the grave. He is portrayed at the moment of
resurrection, of rising from the grave... Alongside him stands his
wife and sister Isis".
Five Egyptian bas-reliefs, created supposedly fifteen hundred
years before Christ, tell in pictures and inscri ptions that a divine
messenger stands before the virgirl queerl M ut-em-ua and reports
that she is to bear a son. It is explained in the second picture who
will be the father: the sun god Ammon and the royal virgin are
embracing each other. The next reveals a sense of the previous: the
immaculate conception of the divine seed. In the fourth is presented
the scene itself of the birth of the royal god-man. Well, and the
fifth depicts for us, as it should, the worshi p of the infant. Three
figures on bended knees, being the three Christian wise men, greet
and present him gifts.
All exactly as it is described in the Gospels.
Arthur Drews cites the picture of the "ancient" god Mithras
- the so-called "Mithraic lcon".The head of Mithras is encircled
by a halo with SU1l rays, as on the icons of Christ. Arthur Drews
cautiously remarks:
"It hardly is accidental that some Christian icons - portrayals
of Christ - resemble this picture. Around the deity's head are a
halo and circle".
379
 Let us say it like this: it is not that jesus Christ is "similar"
to Mithras,but that the god Mithras is oneof the forms of worship
to jesus Christ after the 11 tb century A.D. let tIS recall that the
Scaligerian history considers Mithras an Eastern "ancient" Aryan
god, and subsequently an "ancient" Persian deity, the cult of whom
was spread throughout all of Asia Minor.
Regarding the far-reaching parallels between "ancient"
f\itithraism and medieval Christianity, Arthur Drews writes the
following:
"In Rome, the main sanctuary of Mithras is located at the
Vatican, at the location of the present cathedral of Saint Peter. It
was honored there together with the even earlier officially
recognized Attis... Mithras·Attis bears here the name of "Pope-
Father" .
So. And you sec, the "Roman Pope" is called the "Holy
Father" to this day! In which connection, the present Pope, like
that high priest and pontiff, wears on his head a tiara or milhra -
the headdress of Mithras-Attis... he is provided the red soldier's
shoes of Mithras's priests, is in charge of the "rock of God's" keys,
that is of Saint Peter ("Peter" in translation is "Rock") and
ascribes to himself the power to "restrict and absolve".
"The archigallus corresponds to the Pope of Catholic
Christianity... the pope of the Mithras-Attis cult. This pagan pope
had his whereabouts at the Vatican, considered the SUIl as a savior
and worshipped his own "virgin mother-of-god" - the goddess
Cybelc, whom they usually portrayed sitting with an infant in her
arms and who has her own Christian parallel in the Virgin Mary".
let us recall that the castrati worshi pped Cybele and the
priests in particular threw the cut-off genitalia into her face ...
The faiths were getting intertwined and are getting intertwined
into a single tangle.
"Ancient" Mithraism, as too medieval Christianity, has a
teaching about purgatory, the use of an aspersorium and the custom
to cross oneself, that is, to perform the sign of the cross. The
ceremonial dress of the public servants, the performance of a liturgy
in a dead language unknown to the people, the use of a host (a
communion wafer, the Host), an alb, the wide belt and pontifical
cap and the like coincide completely. This is the result of the
investigations of the well-known scientist, j. Robertson. He wrote:
"The Eastern gods 3Jld saviors are the brolhers of jesllS Christ."

380
 N.A. Kuhn added: "The sacred meal of the Mitbras cult
resembles fully the Christian sacrament of communion ... both
Christians and Mithraists considered Sunday as the holy day,
Both Christians celebrated... the birth of Christ on 2S December
and the worshippers of Mithras celebrated the birth of their
"Invincible One" on 2S December".
Memorials have been preserved with an image of the last supper
of the Mithraists. Communion breads marked with Christian crosses
are on these "ancient" images... The famous "chair", the seat of
Peter in Rome, at the Vatican, also, it turns out, belongs to the
Mithraist cult.
The conclusion is simple: the "ancient" cult of Mithras and
the medieval cult of Jesus Christ are practically indistinguishable.
They represent one unit, only named differently.
Summing up some of his own research, Arthur Drews writes:
"He who hopes to prove a difference of Jesus' death from the death
of his Asian kindred, he who cannot recognize in Mary Magdalene
and the other Marys at the cross and the grave of the Savior the
Indian, Asiatic, and Egyptian mother of the gods, the Maia,
Mariamma, or Maritala, as the mother of Krishna is called, Mariana,
Mandane, the mother of the .Messiah. Cyrus, the '*"great mother.
of Pessinut, the sorrowing Semiramis, Miriam, Merris, Myrrha, and
Maira (Maera) ...should not be allowed to butt his nose into
religiously historic questions".
We cannot hope to prove a difference of Jesus from his Asian
kindred and we recognize fully the authority of Arthur Drews
in these complex questions. Nonetheless, we are obliged to say
that, in our opinion, the prototype of Jesus Christ ~ of the man
existed nevertheless. And this most likely is that same Basil
who was described by Anna Comnena. Indeed, very many details
distinguish him from other legends. It is impossible to contrive
them, and one can only see and later usc them in the final
editing of the legend of Christ.
By the way, the expression "final editing" is not precise. They
never edited the Bible, in our view, fully, and therefore, it to this
day contains clear traces of the previous editing, compelling
theologians to propose different explanations, it would seem, of a
completely clear and understandable text.
If one is to say to a modern Christian that Jesus Christ was
hung to a tree (in the direct sense), and not crucified on a cross, he
38\
will be hurt to the depths of his soul. And naturally, he will not
agree with it, although he certainly is acquainted with the opinion
of the Apostles Peter and Pau l. Here is what Peter said to the
high priest of the Sanhedrim: "The God of our fathers raised
Jesus Whom you killed by hanging him on a tree." (Acts 5:30).
"And we are witnesses to all that He did both in the country
of the Jews and in Jerusalem; thcy put him to death by hanging
him on a tree" (Acts 10:39).
"He himself bore our sins in his Ixxly on lhe tree". (I Peter 2:24).
The Apostle Paul confirms: "And when they had fulfilled all
that was written of Him, thc)' took him down from the tree, and
laid Him in a tomb". (Acts 13:29).
"Christ redeemcd us from the curse of the law, haVing become
a curse for us, for it is written: 'cursed be everyone who hangs on a
tree'''. Galatians 3:13).
Today is acceptable to think that the expressions "crucified
on a cross" and "hung on a tree" arc equivalents, inasmuch as the
cross was wooden. But even if onc is to admit that the cross .and
the tree arc one and the same, then "crucified" and "hung" arc
different things all the same. In our opinion, "hung on a tree" is
evidence of the fact that the method of killing Jesus, in the
representations of the first editors of the Bible, was by no means
what we know according to the canonical texts of the Scd pturc.
There is a basis to propose that even the tragedy itself of
Judas's betrayal and the death of Jesus looked at first somewhat
different than now.

382
 Let's look at the pictures created by artiste; up to the 17 th century.
Giotto di Bondonc portraycd the 12 apostles with halos over
their heads. Consequently, all of them are saints, including Judas,
who is embracing Jesus: still - a beloved disciple. He is not a
traitor, otherwise it is not understood why Giotto painted him
with the halo of a saint.
judas looks like a handsome youth in this fresco. In the series
of frescoes (Kiss of judas), painted for the Arena Chapel (Padua),
Giotto painted a completely different man. As art specialists write:
"The thin, beautiful face of Christ with the high forehead and
serene look, and alongside is the hidcous profile of lhe betrayer with
malicious eyes beneath a low forehead. jesus meets His fate calmly
and with fortitude. They arc thc lwo poles of human characteristics:
goOO and evil, nobility and baseness, beauty and uglincss".

The Last Supper.

An altar frontispiece from the SUligueroJa monastery, supposedly the S6CCf1d half of the 17 century, in fact

383
 There are eleven apostles depicted here. Why not twelve?

The great Albrecht Durer (1471-1528) also depicted eleven

apostles. One could assume that the traitor Judas is absent in the
engraving. But, no, judging by the subject, the beloved disci pIe is
sleeping beside Christ and the latter is fondly embracing the apostle
while communicating the tidings of his forthcoming death by betrayal.
There can be one conclusion: The Gospel is still in the process
of creation. The twelfth apostle will appear many decades later,
and only then wilJ Judas begin to fulfill his shameful role for
thirty pieces of silver.
And what is more, as we already have been saying, they edited
the Bible over the centuries, and differe'lt versions of the biography
of Jesus are still reflected in it.
Let us touch on the problem~ of His parents. In the Gospel of
John, Philli p, a disci pie of Jesus, says that they had found the one
"of whom Moses wrote in the law and also the prophets wrote, Jesus
of Nazareth, the son of Joseph." in the genealogy cited at the start of
the Gospel of Matthew, it is noted that Jesus is a descendant of
David and Abraham through Joseph and not through Mary. In
other words Jesus - the son of Joseph, had, as it said in the Gospel
of John, other brothers and sisters. It is not a question of cousins,
about whom they often speak today. John uses a word which means
"brothers" in particular, the mooern theologian Jacques Duquesne,
author of best-sellers about Christ and his mother, Mary, emphasizes.
Later on, the Christian church did not sujt Joseph's relatives,

384
and he was pushed aside from the natural process of the appearance
of Jesus. In order to show the divinity of Jesus, the Churchmen
deprived Mary of the features of a person of flesh and blood and
spiritualized here, having transformed her into a virgin. They made
use of pagan legends, in particular, Greek, where it is full of stories of
virgins who have been impregnated by the gods. Contempt for the
body and sexuality preVailed, which is characteristic for Gnostics.
At first the church doctrines about the mother of Jesus were
scanty. However, a most acute need appeared in people in medieval
Europe for a protector in heaven. The point is that in the 13-18th
centuries the so-called little Ice Age of Maunder-Sparer-Wolf was
raging. The Black Sea, Danube, the Bosporus Strait and the Dardanelles
iced up. The grapes did not grow on the southern shore of the
Mediterranean Sea. The grain harvest was scanty. [n the winter as is
noted in the chronicles, the birds froze on the wing and cattle perished.
Therefore, in Europe in one place or another, hunger and death
were collecting their awful tribute. At the same time, cities and Villages
periodically were devastated by plague and cholera, brought in from
the Orient along the trade routes. The people ne<..-'<ied an intercessor
against an angry God, and the Virgin Mary became lhe one.
Her popularity also enabled the invention in the Middle Ages
of Purgatory, an important doctrine of Christian belief. In all the
preceding faiths, including Judaism, there is no notion of
"Purgatory." It appeared when on Earth feudal law, and more
precisely - lawlessness, was replaced .by the law of the bourgeois
and courts arose in which they not only accused, but also defended
the accused. And Purgatory became their reflection in faith. Here
on the scales of heavenly justice the righteous and unrighteous
deeds of those who have died are weighed and the sins are washed
away with the prayers of their living relatives and with their
money to the treasury of the church. The more gold and similar
coins scattered into the church poor-boxes, the faster the souls pass
through Purgatory and reach Paradise. A very business-line
doctrine, which caused a scandalous trade in pardons, with the aid
of which the right for entry into Paradise was sold.
The stay in the temperate fire of Purgatory depends also on the
intercession of the Queen of Heaven. This is no longer the world
beyond the grave of the Egyptians, where the fate of the dead, as we
have said, depended on whether be was able to deceive his judges.

385
Now the intercessor stands watch over his interests. A5 Jacques
Duquesne emphasizes, Purgatory "causes a need for an "advocate"
who is able to defend the accused in difficult trials." And it was
not possible to present a better advocate than the Virgin Mary.
Her cult as a defender quickly became universal. In the 19th
century, apparitions of the Virgin Mary became all the more frequent,
and in 1950, the doctrine of the Assumption was proclaimed. This
holiday is based on the story that having died a natural death and
being buried in Gethsemane, Mary was raised up into heaven. After
the opening of her grave, a bouquet of roses was discovered instead of
any remains. The legend clearly belongs to the pen of a poet.
"The parents of Jesus are Nazarenes". We are assured that,
having read these words, there are few readers who will find
anything doubtful in them. If they are from the city of Nazareth,
that means they arc called Nazarenes! And Jesus is also a Nazori or
a Nazorean.
However, the whole secret is in the fact that Nazori and Nazorean
in fact (in ancient Hebrew) mean "holy, pure", and not the fact that
He is from the city of Nazareth by birth. Such a city simply did
not exist in the legendary times of Jesus. Instead, different personages
of Judaic legends were called "Nazori"; they are encountered also
in the Qumran maJluscri pts with the same name.
Today they think that "Nazorean" was a common name of
Israelites who underwent Christian Baptism in the Jordan River.
Iranian Mandaens, for example, call themselves "Nazori" to this
day, that is, "the pure". After the demarcation of Judaism and
Christianity, Jews began to call all Christians "Nazori," and "the
Nazorean heresy" is Christianity itself.
But this still isn't everything! It is a question above all of the
Gnostic training of the Nazori. About their notion of "purity"
and about their notions of Christ, which were set forth in detail
in one of the previous chapters. This is why Christ is "pure." The
pagan postulate crossed into modern Christianity without the
slightest changes. It only is treated another way.
It is not surprising that they accepted such a Christ without
reservations. The allure of the main idea: there is an intermediary
between God and the earthly world, equal to God the father and
simultaneously human in all his manifestations - was colossal. He
is dear and comprehensible to everyone. He even called out during

386
the crucifixion to the SUIl GOO, to Helios, quite like a man: "Eli, Eli,
lama sabach-thani?" "My GOO, my God, why hast thou fOrs<lken me?"
And the sweeping, by historic measures, expansion of the new
Christian teaching is explained in this way.
Besides the figure of God Incarnate, Christianity also created
the figure of God himself. In comparison with Judaism, it determined,
at last, his appearance, that is it imparted to him a human form. The
Lord turned out to be a powerful old man with a white beard. The
era had ended of the Israelitish unseen Creator, of whom it was not
understood where he was and it was not understood how he
interacted with man. Henceforth he sat in the heavens. He had a
throne, servants, and a choir of angels sang hymns of praise to him.
Some close to God helped to administer righteous justice, others
served as God's heralds, still others flew after the souls, and others
yet stood at the gates of Paradise.
In a word, the same as earthly masters: in a throne room full of
servants, all abustle, a COUlt orchestra plays, castrated boy-Cupids sing,
and the sovereign sits in the most honored scat, surrounded by those
who have been favored with the monarch's attention and mercy. It
is familiar, customary and attractive. Especially if one considers that
in this throne room, that is, in the Christian paradise, it is not necessary
to do anything and at the same time there is plenty to eat.
The undoubted influence of paganism has appeared also in the
Christian rituals. In the notion of modern people, paganism is
strongly connected with masks, dancing around bonfires, wild
howls, colored faces and human sacrifices. That is, with all those
that are peculiar to the tribes whkh have stood up to now at the
low stages of development.
As a matter of fact, paganism includes also the most complex
mysteries wh-ich talk about the legends and tradjtions and about
the origin of the world and the forefathers. In lndja, China, Jap<ln
and a number of other Asian states, mysteries even now enjoy
huge popularity. In which connection, the Lndians cOllverted them
into the most complex dances, where every gesture has a clear cut
meaning, and, therefore, spectators somehow read whole poems about
the past in the rhythms and movements of the dancers. The famous
Japanese Noh theatre, in which only men perform, also resulted
from religious mysteries and continues their traditions.
Documents testify that the Christian church also went through

387
a stage of mysteries and theatrical plays on Biblical subjects. And
they were not played out just imywhere, but in the churches.
Accounts of the Orthodox bishop, Abraham of Suzdal, have been
preserved from 1439. He had visited Florence, and what he saw
so struck him, that he described in detail not only the subject of
the mysteries, but also the length and width of the stage, the color
and design of the curtain, the decorations, and the sound effects.
The mysteries about how the archangel Gabriel brought to the
Virgin Mary news about the forthcoming birth of the Son of God,
and also the ascension of Christ into Heaven subdued the bishop.
He spoke of them as of "a fine (beautiful) and wonderful vision".
However, the pagan divine sources included also much more,
which also was perceived by Christianity in the first stages of its
development. We have in mind bacchanals and orgies in their
direct meaning and fulfillment. It is a question not of the debauchery
as such, but only about the religiOUS ceremony which enables the
achievement of the highest ecstasy in the presence of relations with
God. We already have touched on this theme in the previous chapter.
We shall add several touches.
The historian Alexander Paradisis, who sides on the points-of-
view of the Scaligerian chronology, has written:
"Not a trace remains from the reclusive and piolls life of the
monasteries of the first centuries of Christianity and the corruption
of the church and morals in them reached unbelievable
dimensions ... Even the clothing of the nuns, which emphasized
their natural beauty and slenderness, did not promote stringent
morals Almost all the female monasteries of Italy accepted male
guests Everything is correct except the word cChristianity•.
It is a question of the rejected asceticism of Judaic monotheism.
Really, not a trace remained of it.
Saint Didier described that time with relish: "Nothing in Venice
evoked such interest as the monasteries. There were private guests
and grandees there. And since all the nuns are beautiful and slender,
not one was left without a lover. And the concern of the overseers
about morals was expressed in the fact that they helped the nuns
find more skillful ways of meeting with lovers and shielding them.
During the carnival in Venice (and they stretched it out there for
almost half a year), the women's monasteries were turned into dance
halls, filled with men in masks ... The clothing was narrow at the

388
waist, with a large diicol1eHi, which made possible seeing the white
and magnificent body of the nun. {Rodocanachi (E. J, La femme
ltalienlIc, avant, pendant et apres 10 Renaissance, Paris, 1922).
Charles Louis Polnitz noted that the Venetian nuns had their
hajr curled, that they wore short dresses, whjch did not cover the
slender legs, and they covered their breast only when they sang in
the church choir.
The clothing of the nuns of Rome also was not distinguished
by modesty. And the Florentine convents, according to the
testimony of one of thc abbots of a male monastery who was visiting
Florence, reminded one of mythological nymphs, and not of "brides
of Christ" (Pizzichi, Viaggio per l'aLta !talia, Firerlze, 1820).
Theatres were established in many monasteries and it was decided
to give performances, but only nuns were able to perform in them.
Even the nuns of Genoa were not distinguished by restraint.
It was noted with regret in one of the papal decrees: "The sisters
of the convcnts of Saint Philli p and Saint Jacobare wandering the
streets of Genoa, and they commit indecent deeds which their
unbridled fancy dictates to them" (ALexander Paradisis, "The Life
and Activity of Balthasar Cossa". (Pope John XXflJ. 19802. ).
The cult of the phallus once agajn had bloomed in splendid color.
The scholar Champfleury wrote in the 19t~ century about the
decoration of the Christian churches:
"On the walls of the halls of some Christian temples we see with
astonishment depictions of a man's sexual organs, which toadyishly
are flaunted among the objects designated for divine service... such
pornographic sculptures in the temples have been carved by the stone
masons with surprising innocence... The Bordeaux scholar and
archaeologist, Leo Drouyn, showed me curious samples of shameless
sculptures which were flaunted in the old churches of his province,
which he hides in the depth of his files! (Champ{leury. "Histoire de
la Caricature au moyen age" ).
In which connection, what seems striking today, in particular
such semi-pagan veneration of Jesus Christ has been considered
to be true! In 1427, Saint Bernardino da Siena was accused of
heresy for the fact that he had propagated and spread the cult and
monogram of the name of Jesus in all the cities where he had come
to preach with great zeal and pomp. The piety propagated by him
seemed to very many as some kind of impudent and illicit

389
innovation. Poggio Bracciolini, an apostolic writer of the Roman
Curia and a great forger of history, complained about Bernardino,
toward whom very many Roman monks behaved as toward a
heretic and idolater.
Drastic changes in the rites began when negative social
consequences had begun to accrue in Bacchic religious practice. The
universal licentiousness by no means enabled a strengthening of state
authority and spiritual monopoly of a new era. The Western European
church of the 15-1&" centuries had to take a course back to the former,
imperial ascetic style of monotheism. Otherwise, it was impossible to
stop the self-willed person of pagan faiths. And just then did
Bernardino da Siena become a saint.
The fact that the Judaic and Christian customs in this period
represented a single complex is seen distinctly from the descri ptions
of the medieval Byzantine authors.
According to John Damascus, the Christian rite of ordination
lasted three years (as with the Jews,) John reports that a candidate
was obligated symbolically to pass through several stages. Further
he describes these stages:
- a renaissance in the Holy Spirit, dying- resurrection in Christ,
- the Flood,
- crossing the Red Sea,
- circumcision on the eighth day (I).
Finally, after three years of training, on the night of the holy
Sabbath, the "tea.chef" proclaims prayers, where through the address
"Israel" resounds, and the man becomes a Christian. (The ~A century,
according to the traditional chronology, £xpositio fidei, Schriflen 2:181~
/86, 23/:23-25).
Let us add that the rite of baptism had to be performed
exclusively "by immersion or dipping in water" ("The Confession
of Faith," 1644), and thjs is a repetition of the Jewish ablution.
As is seen, the rite of baptism was not so easy and quick as
today, and was not distinguished much from the Jewish giyur.
For example, the crossing the Red Sea was considered by the
Byzantines as their own holiday, since they were convinced that
they in particular had crossed the sea, and at the same time had
"forgotten" completely that this was a campaign of the Jews.
Don't let the fact that the word "Israel" often was used and
is used in Christian prayers confuse the reader. Here is how the

390
Biblical Encyclopedia explains it:
"Israel (One who fights against God) (Genesis 32, 28) is the
name given to Jacob when he fought with God in the form of the
Angel of God. "Then he said (to him), 'Your name shall no more be
called Jacob, but Israel, for you have striven with God and with
men and have prevailed'''. According to the meaning of the Dame
Israel, which was given by God to Jacob in the presence of such a
significant and mysterious event, this latter llame was made common.
In the metaphorical meaning, it embraces the whole Church of God
<Isaiah 49:3, Romans 9:6).
Even the names of the Old Testament kings were common.
They also had a metaphorical meaning. In the famous Russian
chronicle "Zadonshchina" it said (a translation into modern
Russian):
"The land, the Russian land ... has been visited for King
Solomon".
In another manuscri pt is written:
... "as it was until now for King Solomon, so it will be even
now for Grand Duke DmUry Ivanovich".
It turns out that in the Middle Ages Russia was under the
authority of Solomon! The aUlhors of the chronicles were not joking.
They really considered the Judak king their own contemporary.
But let us return to how pag.:wism was extirpated in Christianity.
They began to call to account above all their own personnel
- the clergy. Severe decrees about the celibacy of the priesthood
followed. Later they "put them off into the past", into the I ph
century A.D., and ascribed it to "Pope Gregory VII," that is to
"Pope Hildebrand" ("Ablaze with Gold"). Today in particular,
great attention, which was devoted to this problem during the
religious reform of the I ph century, is ascribed to "Pope
Hildebrand". Strict commands about the deposition of all those
c1ericaJ pastors who continued to carryon a conjugal life were
transferred to tbat century - most likely from the 15-t6'" centuries.
The commands caused a storm, since almost all Roman spiritual
persons were married. But the resistance was overpowered, although
it required years of struggle for it.
They dealt with simple parishioners by far more quickly and
more strictly. As the traditional historians write, "many were seized,
and it was over for them with quick and severe punishment...

391
The majority of women who had been taking part in the criminal
cult, were handed over for punishment to the home of their relatives,
and only when no one of the close relations decided to fulfill the
death sentence pronounced for them, they were given over to the
hands of the executioner". A custom, which has been preserved to
our day in some Moslem communities. In a changed form: the
relatives of the dead person deal with the life of the killer - he is
included in the laws of the Shariat.
The famous medieval descri ptions of "Devil 's Sabbaths"
in Western Europe, very likely, have as their prototype all those
Christian Bacchanals, but which already had been declared
by the new reformers of the Western church as the "handiwork
of the Devil".

392
IN THE ~HADOW
CHAPTER NINETEEN

One cannot but say that the official legend of Jesus Christ by
no means suits everyone. Some have not seen in it the Son of God,
others thought that He did not die, and still others supposed lhat
when He does come, he will punish severely the powers that be (or
breaking God's covenants.
A variant of the faith attracts attention which says that Jesus
Christ did not die on the cross. There is an opinion, which even
today finds its adherents, that they brought Christ down from the
cross alive. True, he did not rcact to the pain of a blow from a lance,
but only because he was ullconscious. So, there was no resurrection
from the dead. The execution and subsequent resurrection are a spectacle
which is necess.:'1f)' to "bring people to the realization of God and the
ful fillment of rational religious princi pies". (AnaL-Diy Gusev. "Tile
Mystery of Life and the Teachings of Jesus Chrisf'. 2003).
It further is maintained that Jesus left Palestine in the company
of his mother Mary, Magdalene and Thomas. They reached
Damascus and passed through Persia. Jesus lived in Kashmir
until old age, next to Dahl Lake, healed people and preached. His
grave supposedly is located in the center of modern Sri nagar.
A curious variant. He, along with the others, would have had
full right to existence if not for one circumstance. Jesus Christ,
more precisely - the man, details of whose life were reflected in the
legend of Christ, never lived in Palestine. This fact alone, which
is confirmed by an analysis of the Bible and other religious sources,
makes all discussions of the further earthly life of Jesus Christ
senseless. Their authors are on the side of the Scaligerian chronology,
unscientific in and of itself that predetermines the fatal weakness
of a hypothesis of a similar type.
But in that case - when and where did the events occur
which are described in the New Testament? Anatoly Fomenko

393
and his followers have performed a number of studies which have
brought significant clarification to these questions.
It is considered that the Roman monk Dionysius Exiguus
calculated the year of Christ's birth for the first time in the Gtb
century A.D., that is, more than 500 years after the event dated by
hjrn. In order to achieve such a result, Dionysius at first calculated
the date of Christ's resurrection, and for that purpose the church
tradition wa" used that Christ was crucified in the 31 st year of his
life. The date of the resurrection, according to Dionysius, is 25 March
5539 "after Adam," and the year of Christ's birth, consequently, is
the 5,5081b "after Adam" according to the Byzantine era.)
Dionysius's calculations evoked doubts in the West.
"Arguments about the date of Christ's birth continued in
Constantinople until the 14 tb century." ([van Anatolievich
Klimishin. "Calendar and Chronology" J.
Our correction: the arguments were occurring in the 16 th
century! There was nothing about which to argue earlier: the new
religion still had not been formed as an independent teaching.
As Anatoly Fomcnko emphasizes in his research, "X" originally
designated the start of the new era after the birth of "Christ".
From what did Dionysius proceed? From church tradition
that Christ arose on 25 March, a Sunday on the second day after
the Passover, which, consequenUy, occurred in the year of his
crucifixion on Saturday 24 March. Here are the "paschal conditions"
- the basis of the calculations.
One can find their whole assortment in Matthew Vlastar's
"Collection of Rules Devised by Holy Fathers":
"Because the Lord suffered for our salvation in 5539, when the
circle for the sun was 23, the circle for the moon - 10, and the Jews
had Passover on the Sabbath (as the Evangelists write) on 24 March.
The resurrection is on the next Sabbath after this on 25 Marcil...
Christ arose. A legitimate Passover takes place according to the equinox
at the 141b moon (that is, at full moon) - from 21 March until 18
April - our own Easter takes place 011 the next Sunday after it".
The 5,539tb "after Adam" - this is exactly the year calculated
by Dionysius. Deducting 31 years from it - Christ's age - he
derived the start of our era - the 5,508th year "after Adam".
We shall repeat the calendar indications for the year of

394
Christ's resurrection:
l) circle for the sun 23,
2) circle for the moon 10,
3) the previous day, 24 March, was the Passover, which is
celebrated on the day of the 14 th moon (that is on the full moon),
4) the Passover was on Saturday, and Christ arose on Sunday.
These four points are called the calendar "conditions of the
Resurrection" .
Anatoly Fomenko performed calculations for every year in
the interval from 100 years before the new era until 1700 A.D. in
order to calculate when these conditions were fulfilled. The day of
the spring full moon (the 14 th moon or the Passover) was calculated
using Gaussian formulas and the Christian Easter, circle for the
SUIl and circle for the moon· using paschal. As too with both
Dionysius and Matthew Vlastar, a proposition was advanced that
the day of the Resurrection was a paschal day according to the
paschal calculation chart.
The result was this: The calendar "conditions of the
Resurrection" were fulfilled only once - in 1095 A.D. Once in
eleven centuries!
Christ's birth belongs, thus, approximately to 1064 A.D.
As we know, in the years of Christ's birth a new star blazed up
in the east, and 31 years later, in the year of the Resurrection, there
was a full solar eclipse. Church sources clearly speak in particular
about the solar ecli pse in connection with Christ's resurrection.
We shall note that a solar ecli psc, and especially a complete one, is
an exceptionally rare event in Palestine. The point is that solar
eclipses, although they happen every year, are visible only in the
narrow stri p of the lunar shadow's trajectory on the Earth ,in contrast
to lunar ccli pses, which are visible all at once from half the territory
of the globe. The Biblical science of the 18-19th centuries, not having
discovered, naturally, a Gospel solar eclipse there "where it was
needed" - in the Palestine of the start of our era - changed it to a
lunar one. All the same, this did not help· they also didn't find a
lunar ecli pse which correlated with it. Despite this, since then it
has become the custom to think that not a solar, but a lunar ccJi psc is
described in the Gospels. But the ecli pse was solar nevertheless.
It turns out, such a pair of the rarest astronomical evento;; - the

395
flare up of a new star and 31 years later a full solar eeli pse in the
Mediterranean really did take place· only not in the first, but in the
11th century A. D! This is the well-known flare up of a new star in
1054 and the full solar eeli pse of 16 February 1086 (on a Monday.)
The shadow of the solar eclipse passed through Italy and Byzantium.
That is, through those places where Christ lived and died, although
they still had not moved it (on paper) to Palestine.
It is curious that vestiges of references about Christ as about'1
living man have been maintained in the medieval chronicles to
our time. For example, in the Chronograph of 1680, it is reported
that Christ himself visited Pope Leo IX (supposedly 1049-1054):
"It is recounted that Christ, in beggarly form, visited him (Leo
IX) in his bedroom." The chronicle supposed that Christ was still
alive and had called on the pope. It is important that this is the
only mention of such a type in the Chronograph besides instances
of the retell ing of the Gospels.
As Anatoly Fomenko discovered, there are parallels with the
Gospel in the biography of Pope Gregory VII, who died supposedly
in t085. He also showed that in many chronicles, 1054 A.D. (the
so-called "fundamental shift of 1,053 years in the chronology") is
implied as year 1 in accordance with "Christ's Birth". This means
that the medieval chroniclers often dated the birth of Christ as
1054 or 1053 in particular.
The dating of the death of the compilers of the Gospels serves
as confirmation of the medieval origin of the legends of God
Incarnate. In particular, the Gospel of Matthew. According to the
Scaligerian history, relics of the Evangelist Matthew were
discovered in 1127. They convince us that they had been
somewhere in obscurity for more than a thousand years, and only
in the 12th century "they discovered them anew". Such is expressed,
for example, by Ulrich Pfeil. Trier. A tour of the most famous
sights. (Kllnslverlag Weick. Passall, 1996).
In our opinion, there was no such thousand ye<lrs. They buried
Matthew with honors immediately after his death in the 15 1b
century. Today his relics are preserved in the German city Trier,
in the Basilica of Saint Matthew. By the basilica's altar is a stone
case of 1786 in which an old sarcophagus with the relics is located.
Above the case is a marble sculpture of Matthew which is dated
1486. A modern guidebook about the basilica reports this.
396
One 01 the pictures of the 8Xewtion 01 saint MIlIfhew. His 8X&aJfioners are in medievaf atmOI. And rtl6y
lf1l !X!CVtinQ him witfl ttlf sid 01.- II gttil!. Ju$I wIlfIfI did he 1M?

The question arises, why did Saint Matthew's relics find

themselves in Trier in particular. After the fall of Tsarigrad~Jerusalem­
Constantinople and the downfall of imperial monotheism, the
Christian teaching needed sai"ts, even those geographically not
connected with the former mother country. Having deprived the
imperial capital of the holy name Jerusalem, adherents of Christianity
also deprived it of the sacred objects of the new teaching. Therefore,
they also transferred both the relics of Saint Matthew and the shirt
of Jesus Christ, which also is called the tunic of Christ, to German
Trew:::::Tricr. One of the nails by which Christ was nailed to the
cross, and a fragment of the cross itself also reached Trier. Today
they are in the museum of the Trier Cathedral.
Other relics connected with Jesus Christ, apparently, have
been spread among other cities of Western Europe - in Germany,
France and Italy. So, a shirt of the Virgin Mary came to German
Aachen, where it is preserved to this very day at the Aachen
Cathedral. They sent the relics of Mark the evangelist to Venice.
They too supposedly "repeatedly" discovered them only in the
397
11 lb century. They were "traveling" no one knows where for a
thousand years. the traditional historians say.
So Constantinople was fully purged of all Christian relics.
It is thought traditionally that the crucifixion of Christ
occurred on Mount Golgotha in that very Jerusalem, which exists
to this day. The canonic Gospels tell us about this in all the
languages of the world. Nonetheless, direct indications to a
completely different place for the fulfillment of thcse dramatic
cvents are contained in the Gospels themselvcs.
In particular. the place of the scene of thc action is unambiguously
indicated in the English variant of thc Gospel of thc Apostlc Paul
to the Galatians (Galatians 3: I). It says: "0 Foolish Galatians,
who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before
whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified
(W1011g you?" In Greek: .Galatai ... kat ojtalmoul Ihsoul Cristoz
proegrafh estaurwmenoz ..... means literally: "Galatians... Jesus
Christ before your very eyes was persecuted according to the law
for his beliefs by being cnlcified". This means in particular the
Galatians were witnesses of the last agonies of Christ, and his
crucifixion happened among the Galatians, before their very eyes.
Let us recall that the natural center of the region where the
Galatians lived was located on the Bosporus, no matter how they
called it: Tsarigrad. Constantinoplc, or Istanbul.
TS<lrigrad and its leafy Mount Beykol are the place of the great
tragedy, opposite Gul Gala - that is, in Swedish, "The Golden Gate",
the place which has been turned into Golgotha for Jesus Christ
(Yaroslav Kesler), Right there, besides, is located also a colossal
tomb in which, as it is thought, is buried Joshua of the Old Testament.
In the Western European variants of the lew Testament, they call
him simply Jesus.
Several words about this lomb. It exists also today and is a
place of worshi p. Local inhabitants call it the grave of Saint lusha,
or Usha, that is of Jesus. Above the lomb an earthen risc 17 metcrs
long and 2 meters wide has been made. It is surrounded by a
fence. At opposite ends of thc tomb are two round stones, which
resemble small millstones. In the cenler of one are seen a quadrangular
opening and a very noticeable crack. All this structure is enclosed
with a high stone wall with two doors. Worshi ppers enler one of
them, walk around the tomb and exit through the other door.
This all corresponds exactly to medieval descri ptions of the

398
tomb of Jesus Christ. For example, in "The Pilgrimage of Abbot
Daniil" it says in modern translation: "The crucifixion of the
Lord is found on the eastern side on the stone... And in the
middle of that stone has been carved a hole of nearly a cubit in
depth ... Here was the Lord's cross set up. In the ground itself
beneath that stone lays the head of the primeval Adam ... And
that stone has broken up above Adam's head ... And there is this
fissure in the stone even to this day ... The Lord's crucifixion and
that holy stone arc enclosed all round with a wall... there are two
doors (in the waID".
Even the number of doors coincides.
So, according to the new chronology, the Galatians - the
Jews in Tsarigrad • crucified Christ, but not in present Jerusalem.
(Gleb Nosovsk'iy. Aflatoly Fomellko. "A Reconstruction of
Universal History". 1999).
Turks and Tatars appear in the role of the Romans in this
picture. Let us look more closely at the images in the background.
The outlines of the well known Constantinople are visible. Let us
increase the size of a fragment of Jan van Eyck's picture and combine
it with a modern depiction of the temple of Saint Irene, the most
ancient in Constantinople. The temple of Saint Irene is identified
suffiCiently distinctly. By the way, the presence of two minarets
speaks to the fact that van Eyck was painting in Istanbul exactly
in the 15th century - just then were the two minarets installed
alongside Saint Irene. Artists of the 15-161h centuries doubted not
for a minute that Christ was crucified on the Bosporus.
The etymology of the world "Galatia" itself is recognized
as unclear. Located on the Golden I-lorn opposite the "Eternal
City," they called this place Sykai. According to various primary
sources, there were, besides homes, theatres, baths and similar
establishments there_
In 528, Sykai was given the status of a city and renamed as
J usti nianopol is.
From the 7111 century on, the city was considered abandoned,
since later historians do not mention it. Instead of it, they mention
the small port of Galatou.
Among the monasteries located near Galatou is mentioned the
marturion of the Maccabees. We consider it a direct indication of the
fact that Jews lived here, those same Galatians who saw the execution
of Christ. In the t JIb century, Galatia generally became a Jewish

399
quarter, located in the most convenient place - near the port.
Financiers and merchants were obligated to live here in particular.
The crusaders who captured Galatia in 1203 drove out the
Jews, but not for long. According to the traditional chronology, in
1303, they gave back Galatia to the Genoese. They settled the
Jews there again, and even built a wall, which created a classic
ghetto. Galatia was the wealthiest and most respectable region of
Constantinople until 1453. (Yaroslav Kesler).
It is indicated as the place of Christ's crucifixion in the epistle
of the Apostle Paul, and not of the other Evangelists, and this is by
far not accidental. As Yaroslav Kesler seriollsly maintains, the
Apostle Paul was a key figure in the formation of the institution of
the church. He, per se, was the first father of the church. In
particular, Paul in his subsequently canonized epistles formulated
the legal standards of church life in Christ's name.
He said that he had died, haVing been crucified with Christ,
after which Christ himself had settled in his body. That is, he
placed himself higher than the original apostles and appropriated
the right to act in the Ilame of Christ, who was instilled in him.
This is the factual beginning of the new, Paulist church.
There were many Roman Popes uamed Paul. Their history
provides a key to undersblllding the process of the formation of the
institution of the church. There is mention of Pope Paul I, who
reigned supposedly in 757-768, for the first time in the 16th century
- in a book of the Popes that was "happily discovered" then, but
necessarily written at this time. His activity coincided with the
first anointing of a king by the Pope (Pippin's son,Charlemagne).
Thus was the first "historic" precedent set of the manifestation of
the supremacy of spiritual authority over secular. It was extremely
fortunate and timely that, in the very period when the medieval
independent states of Europe were being formed, they "found" the
book of Popes which established the supremacy of ecclesiastical
authority over the temporal.
The next Pope Paul (II) appeared in the history in the second
half of the 15th century. He belonged to a wealthy Venetian family
and, haVing arrived in Rome, bought a cardinal's cap there. The
torture of heretics - academies - Platonics - was his favorite
occupation.
The two subsequent Pauls appear in the troubled time of the
16th century. Pope Paul III (1534-1550) was the founder of the

400
 institution of the Catholic inquisition, who legalized Ignatius of
Loyola's order of Jesuits. He himself also convoked the famous
Council of Trent. Pope Paul IV (1555-t559) was a violent battler
with written heresy, the instigator of the literary auto-da-fe and
the creator of the first "Index of Forbidden Books." Pope Paul V
(1605-1621) was a counter-reformer.
It would not be worth remembering all this if the history of
the Popes had not confirmed that the Roman church really
appeared in the 15th century and it became "Catholic" only in the
16 th century.
It is necessary to explain briefly the role and significance of
the Vatican in the organization and development of Christianity.
Let us recall the conception of the new chronology. Its essence
consists of the fact that the modern Vatican is the offspring of the
late Middle Ages, and all the popes, who supposedly headed the
Catholic church in the centuries which had preceded, in fact did
not exist, inasmuch as there had not been any Catholic church
itself. They appeared (on paper) when it was necessary to extend
the history of Christianity by fifteen hundred years. Traditional
historians, while not repudiating the Scaligerian chronology,
recognize that, of the dozens of Popes whose names are designated
on the "ancient" list, nothing is known.
The Catholic encyclopedia does not clarify the origin of the
words "Vatican" and "Pope". Here is a quotation from it:
"The territory on the right bank of the Tiber between Monte
Mario and Gianicolo (janiculum) wa<; known to antiquity as the
Ager Vaticanus, and, owing to its marshy character, the low-lying
portion of this district enjoyed an ill repute. The origin of the
name Vaticanus is uncertain; some claim that the name comes from a
vanished Etruscan town called Vaticum." [Ager in Latin means
land].
This is a fact which is surprising for the history of the main
spiritual center of one of the world's religions. The point, apparently,
is that the modern Christian Vatican is not at all interested in
recollections of its own roots and, as many other social organizations,
prefers to remember only "that which is necessary."
In Hebrew, "vatic" means cider, old+timer. The ending "an"
is in exact correspondence with the rule in Hebrew grammer by
which a noun is formed by the addition of the suffix "-en".
"Vatican" is a "council" of elders or old~timers, and nothing more.
401
They call people who have lived in israel for many years "vatikim".
According to our version, Vatican was simply a council of
ciders of the various tribes in paganism. Then, with the expansion
of monotheism, it became a religious and ideological center in the
time of the emperor, having been established in Constantinople.
And only after the collapse of the empire, after the demarcation of
world religions, did the Vatican become the center of Catholicism.
We already have talked about the term "pope". One only
would like to add that etymologically, "papas" is connected with
"papais". And this word designates the post of the "castle's chief
eunuch". The chief eunuch, a castrato, wore a cross in many religious
ceremonies. III our view, the roots of the papacy comc from that
period of history when the castrati played a speci<d role in the
state and in the spiritual leadership of society, as discussed in the
chapter "To What the Ancestors Prayed". At the same time, it
becomes understandable what sort are the origins of celibacy which
were obligatory for Catholic priests.
But why in particular was Italian Rome afforded the honor of
being the place for locating the Vatican? The "Eternal City" was
located not on tbe shores of broad rivers or bays, which were suitable
for transportation and easy communications, but in the mountains!
That is, far away from the main routes. This alone leads one to
thought'i of whether it was the C<lpital of a state. At the same time,
archaeologiSts recognize that there is no archaeological evidence of
the existence of the greatest city of antiquity and the capital of a
worldwide empire on the territory of Rome on the Tiber.
Let us add the sociological and cultural anomalies which
have been noted by a number of researchers. Here, for example, is
what Alexander Men, a specialist in the history of religion, writes:
"It is significant that in the first centuries not one theologian
who wrote in Latin was a native Roman" (Father Alexander Men.
History of Religions, volume 6).
Of course there were no Romans - theologians or other :
there was no city of Rome.
The whole cycle of works on "ancient" Romc is Utopian
literature which was composed in the 15·181h centuries as a basis
for the formation of independent European self·determination.
Speaking more simply, "ancient" Rome is the foundational legend
for European civilization.

402
 And wby in particular Rome nevertheless? Everything falls
into place if one supposes tbat in the location of tbe present Rome
a monastery or cburcb were establisbed at first. People built many
Christian monasteries and cburcbes in tbe mountains in particular,
far from tbe everyday bustle, closer to God. Afterwards cities grew
up around them.
We find indirect confirmation of this version ill a number of
written documents. In particular, in a letter of an abbot of the
Cathedral of Saint Peter. It is dated supposedly 739 A.D. Its
author, Gregory II, calls bimself Pope. Let us repeat again that
"Papa" and all its variations up to tbis time have been used by
many peoples to simply designate a priest, particularly, in Russia
and other Orthodox countries.
So, Pope Gregory to His Most Excellent Son, Karl, Sub-King:
In our great affliction we have thought it necessary to write to
you a second time, believing that you are a lOVing son of St. Peter,
tbe prince of apostles, and of ourselves, and that out of reverence
for bim you would obey our commands to defend the church of
God and his cbosen people. We can now no longer endure the
persecution of the Lombards, for they have taken from St. Peter all
his possessions, even those which were given him by you and your
fathers. These Lombards hate and oppress us because we sought
protection from you; for the same reason also the church of St.
Peter is despoiled and desolated by them. But we have entrusted
a more complete account of all our woes to your faitbfu I subject,
our present messenger, and he will relate them to you. You, oh son,
will receive favor from the same prince of apostles here and in the
future life in the presence of God, according as you render speedy
aid to his church and to us, that all peoples may recognize the
faith and love and singleness of purpose which you display in
defending St. Peter and us and his chosen people. For by doing
this you will attain lasting fame on earth and eternal life in beaven.
(from Oliver J. Thatcher, and Edgar Holmes McNeal, eds., A Source
Book for Medieval History, New York: Scribners, 1905, p. 102)
If one is not distracted by the author's title, then the situation
is as follows. The priest of a huge monastery requests a friendly
feudal lord to defend him from the depridations of another feudal
lord. In doing so, Gregory "forgets" not only to mention his own
high office, but also to mention anything which relates him to the

403
Vatican, or even to Rome, which, in universal belief, is the location of
St. Peter's itself. It is acceptable to mention his services and his
significance in requests. Gregory, speaking about his own possessions,
singles out the role of Saint Peter - "the Prince of the Aposlles,"
whose name the monastery bears. Nothing else is mentioned - for
the simple reason that there is nothing else to mention. The forests
are still noisy and wild goats roam around St. Peter's.
The traditional historiography itself presents the letter as a
creation of "His Holiness".
The Vatican seems eternal to us, haVing been in existence almost
forever. So a common awareness already had been established
that events even of half a century ago are perceived as nothing
very far away. And when we see on the coat of arms of the Vatican
state a pair of crossed keys (from Paradise and Rome), then we
consider them evidence of the inconceivable age both of the Vatican
and of the "eternal city".
By the way, the Vatican state was created only in 1929. On
11 February 2004, it solemnly celebrated its 75th anniversary.
The extremely clear words of the well-known scholar and
Hebraist, Joseph Kastein about One God, are recalled: "It was not
God who willed these people and their world view, but this people
who willed this God and such a world view". It is expressed in
so many words too in relation to the Son of God: "The life and
death of Christ are of our doing".

404
MANKIND'S DISPLACED
MEMORY CHAPTER TWENTY

For some centuries already researchers have been trying to

understand and explain the nature of anti-Semitism. It has spread
everywhere. Its manifestations are found even in those countries
such as Korea or Mongolia, where Jews never lived in the past.
Everywhere the words "Hebrew" or "Jew" evoke vigilance, anxious
alarm, and the expectation of something bad. They resound as a
danger signal.
These feelings more often than not have no relation to specific
Jews. It is impossible to count how many mixed marriages have
been performed, are being performed and will be performed in all
the countries where Jews live. The count comes to many hundreds
of thousands in the United States and Russia. It is not by chance
that the U.S. Jewish community declines from decade to decade -
not owing to emigration to Israel or an increase of the death rate,
but only because children in mixed families stop considering
themselves to be Jews in any meaningful sense. In spite of this,
their non-Jewish relatives frequently maintain a negative attitude
toward Judaism. It is perceived as an abstract Evil, as a sinister
fate, which hangs permanently over mankind.
Such attitudes characterize even Jews themselves. Jewish anti~
Semitism is widespread among a significant part of them. On
the everyday level, it shows itself in the fact that one man or
another considers himself a true Jew but those compatriots whom
he hates, degenerates: "They disgrace us, the real Jews".
A considerable number of anti-Semitic works have been written
by Jewish authors who distance themselves from those who consider
themselves representatives of this people. State and public figures.
businessmen, artists and painters who have Jewish roots in addition
to others as a rule conceal this fact. Jews, who have converted to
Christianity or in general have rejected any kind of religion are
often the most vociferous anti-Semites. The brightest examples of

405
these are the inquisitor Torquemad and the atheist Karl Marx.
The prominent 19th century researcher Daniil Khvolson
considered that in a century "nearly 150 Jews who converted to
Christianity published essays that were hostile with respect to
Jews ... five or six of them were filled with phantasmagoria about
ritual murders. (Daniil Avraamovich Klwolso1l. On Some Medieval
Accusations agai1lst Jews. A Historical {1lvestigation according to
Sources. - St. Petersburg, 1880, pages 279-280},
The prevalence of anti-Semitism and its influence on people
stumps researchers. Prominent men of letters, historians, philosophers
..m d even businessmen (Henry Ford) have taken up this topic.
They have held to various views of Jewry, often diametrically opposed,
of which we spoke in the beginning of the book. They have brought
in as evidence whole libraries of works. Nevertheless, the problem
has not been resolved SO far.
Many contemporary scientists trace the reaSons for anti-
Semitism to xenophobia. Indeed, xenophobia, which means in
translation from the Greek "fear of foreigners", underlies all
nationalistic views. As has been discovered, it is even a princi pie
of animal psychology, which gave birth to natural selection. In the
animal world the outsider, as a rule, brings danger. Therefore, our
smaller brothers will not accept outsiders. And, in the opinion of
psychologists, primitive man inherited this phobia, transferring
the notion of "outsider" to unknown tribes. In primitive society
"we" is always "people" in the direct meaning of the world.
Whereas "they" are not quite people. A further transformation of
this formula: "they arc not quite people" is the corner stone of
racisL doctrine, a negative reaction to everything that originates
from another nation. "Nationalism starts there where the
consciousness of our own individuality changes into a hostile
psychological purpose which incre:.t5eS the feeling of fear, hatred
and intolerance.
They ascribe aggressiveness, ill-will and a whole spectrum of
negative anti-humanistic features to the other people. Their own
on the other hand - they endow with all possible virtues that serve
as a psychological justification of the negative relationshi p to
strangers (V. Iliushelllw)
However, all of this concerns nationalism and xenophobia
on the whole. With respect to anti-Semitism, then its universal
prevalence indicate additional roots, responsible for its uniqueness
406
as a social phenomenon.
We see these roots most of alt in the existence in the Middle
Ages of a worldwide empire of monotheists. When the adherents
of Judaism, Semites from the Middle East, changed into a
predominant priestly caste in the worldwide Catholic-Judaic empire
(they called themselves Catholics!) when they took to introducing
monotheism there and everywhere by force of arms, when, finally,
in its name tbey began to remove from people the last of their
property into the treasury of the emperor, then did hatred for the
Jews flare up into a scaring flame, leaving the deepest footprint on
the historical memory. This hatred raged with especial franticism
after the empire collapsed and nothing protected the "Jew~
foreigners" any longer.
Competition extremely intensified the situation on the part
of the Christian trade and financial capital that was struggl ing
into being. And as expected by the new partici pants of the struggle
for supremacy in the trade and financial markets, they established
as their goal the weakening, and still better - the elimination of
the Jewish competitors, who no longer were supported by the
military power of the former empire. A colossal public relations
smear campaign against the caste of customs duty and tax collectors
was created for these purposes.
The newcomers must be given their due: they brilliantly used
the chronic hatred of the tax-payers. When they were unable to
beat the competitors with smarter transactions, the new masters of
the finances and markets elevated the people to the fight under
slogans of extermination of those who believed otherwise, the
damned murderers of Jesus Christ, the enemies of mankind, lhe devils
incarnate. And then, sometimes in one country and sometimes in
another, the pogroms rolled and the fires of auto~da~fe blazed.
Often, when one really wanted to rob the Jews, the monarchs
didn't bother themselves with slogans and appeals. Daniil
Khvolson cites one such case:
"The German emperor of lhe time, Albrecht, as (he said) the heir
of the emperors Vespasian, Titus and Charlemagne, declared claims
to the supreme truths over the French Jews. Consequently, the King
(Phillippe rv "Tbe Fair") suddenly detained all the Jews of France,
men and women, old people and children, for one day, took from
them all personal assets and real estate, confiscated for his own use
all their debts to Christians and, leaving them only the shirts on

407
their backs, banished 100,000 people from the country, having
reduced them to beggary. "Here are your Jews!. he mockingly said
then to the German emperor•.
Oaniil Khvolson does not mention the situation here, which
is paradoxical at first glance: the king considers the claims of the
German emperor on the French Jews as normal. One would wonder
how one state could enforce its laws 011 the citizens of another
country? This could be the case only if it is a question of people
who have a slIprarwtional status that everyone recognizes. Calling
himself the heir of the emperors Vespasian, Titus and Charlemagne,
Albrecht was speaking, per se, about the legacy of the empire of
monotheists.
In "A History of Anti-Semitism", Leon Poliakov also cites
data which is evidence of the purely material justification for the
persecution of the Jews:
"The connection between the struggle for the purity of the
truth and the class or caste interests is especially k<."Cnly observed
in Castile, where from the end of the 13lh century (according to the
Scaligerian chronology - author's note] the strengthening
bourgeoisie received their own representation in the chapter, and
also the right to send their own delegates to parliament (Cortes)
and to approve taxes".
They themselves didn't keep the pogroms waiting. The arising
bourgeoisie elevated the rabble against the Jews. The slogans are
curious under which the crowds threatened those who believed
otherwise: "In Barcelona the crowd cried: "the rich want to destroy
the common people!" That is, it was a question not of those who
believe otherwise and other nationalities, but of coin purses.
In many works devoted to anti-Semitism, a list of Jewish
pogroms and persecutions is cited which were committed in various
centuries. Here are some lines from this list:
1290 - The expulsion of the Jews from England.
1391 - The pogrom in Seville (Spain). 30,000 people killed.
1394 - The expulsion of the Jews from France.
1492 - Hundreds of thousands of Jews expelled from Spain ...
(M. Chemav "Suicide", "Co'lthlent USA", 2003).
We propose that these events need to be dated to the second
half of the 15lh century, within a time span of 30 - 40 years.
On 2 January 1492, Their Catholic Majesties Ferdinand and
Isabella ceremoniously entered Granada. On 31 March of that
<l08
very same year, they signed an edict banishing the Jews from Spain:
•... We have received information from the inquisitors and
from other persons that contact of Jews with Christians is leading
to the worst of consequenccs... As a result, our sacred Catholic
faith has been humbled and dishonored. Thus, we have come to
the conclusion that the only effective means to put an end to these
misfortunes consists of the final severance of all contacts between
Jews and Christians, and this can be achieved only by the expulsion
of the Jews from our kingdom. (Leon Poliakov).
Events in neighboring Portugal developed somewhat
differently. Expulsion would have created an immediate catastrophe
for that small country's economy. Forced Baptism was the only
solution which was compatible with Portugal's political ambitions.
At Easter 1497, events began to unfold <It an accelerated rate.
They took the children from their parents and carried them to
Baptismal fonts. Those of the parents who did not follow their
children voluntarily were taken there by force several weeks later.
"A blasphemous farce, caused by the lowest and vilest of
material motives" - such was the verdict in the 20 tll century
of Menendez y Pelayo.
The "Jewish Encyclopedia. cites the following numbers: from
England in the 13th century 16,000 Jews were expelled, from
France in the 14th century 100,000, and frolll Spain in the 15111
century - 200,000 people.
Over time, the persecution of the Jews took on a mystical nature.
As their role was forgotten in an empire that had passed intooblivion,
the very existence of this group of people began to be perceived as
evidence of Satan's schemes. They had become the embodiment of
the dark forces, the catylists of Evil in this world. They provoked
awe in their own way, both observing customs alien to the people
around them and eating food unique to them. But chiefly, the
world's gold literally stllck to their hands. It was as if the Devil
himself was protecting them.
This accusation was especially popular in the decades when
the plague and cholera epidemics savaged Europe. As evidence of
the connections of the Jews with Satan was the fact that in the
years of the .Black Deatln fewer of the .Devil incarnate. died
than Christians. ow we understand that the isolated life in the
ghetto and the observance of special purification rituals adopted
in Judaism saved quite a few lives. But at that time they saw in

409
this the hand "of a human sort of enemy". It was alleged that
they, being protected by the Devil, were attempting to annihilate
the Christians, wrongly treating the sick, bringing curses upon them
with witchcraft and even poisoning the wells.
In Chillon a certain Jew under torture "confessed," that sollle
of his like believers in the south of France conspired and prepared
poison from spiders, frogs, lizards, human flesh, Christian hearts and
impure hosts.
They distributed the powder made from this mixLure among
the communities so as to scatter it into the wells from which the
Christians drew water for drinking. This supposedly also caused
the terrible epidemic around all of Europe.
And most often, accusations were repeated of the kidnapping
of Christian infants and their ritual murder.
However, not everything is understood with these accusations.
Traditional historians with some surprise noted that before the 12 th
century, Christian society not once made similar accusations
concerning the Jews. There are some reports about murders committed
for magical and bewitching purposes, but Jews do not figure in
them. Heathens do.
Reflecting on this, the historians assume that "Obviously, the
influence of the horrors which were enkindled by the crusades was
decisive". It turns out that these claims were current even before
the crusades, but quietly; the crusades for the liberation of the Holy
sepulchre only added fuel to a fire already burning.
How so? It is enough to read the records of one of the
partici pants of the crusade, Robert de Clari, which have been
preserved to our time, in order to see what goals the crusaders had
set for themselves. They thought about money and plunder, but
not about the Holy Sepulchre. And even in general their goal was
"slaughter the Saracens," and not ere-take the Sepulchre.• There
is not a single word about Jesus or the cross or about the Holy
Sepulchre! (Edgar Holmes McNea.1 The Conquest of Constantinople
of Robert of Clari. New York, 1936). obert de Clari also didn't
mention one word about the Jews having been "Christ's killers".
In our opinion, they did not accuse the Jews of ritual murder
for the reason that the Israelites, that is the followers of monotheism,
were everyone ;n that period. Above all they were the ruling elite of
the empire! Only when the empire collapsed was all the opprobrium
previously aimed at the polytheists directed toward the Jews.

410
 The dubious hOllor of the birth of blood libel belongs to England.
According to the traditional chronology, at the start of the 12th century
here, in Norwich, the first ritual murder was investigated. The Ixxly
of a young apprentice, William, subsequently C<1.llnonized as a saint,
was discovered the day before Good Friday in a forest.
The first accusation and first murder of a Jew. A broken-
down debtor knight of the dead boy cut him down. "An accidental
coincidence", write the traditional historians.
Hugo of Lincoln in England, supposedly crucified by Jews in
1255, even became the hero of folk ballads.
There was also such a variant of the accusations: In the Temple
of Jerusalem supposedly they worshi pped the head of a donkey
(according to another variant - of a pig) and once a year they
sacrificed a captured and well fed Greek. Why in particular a
well-fed, and not a skinny Greek, history conceals.
If one is to believe the modern Russian anti-Semite Dleg
Platonov, then in the Kievan caves are preserved to this day relics
of Saint Evstratius, "who was crucified on a cross by Jews on
Good Friday in a rite of slandering Jesus Christ in 1096" (Oleg
Platoflov, Russia's Crown of Thorns. A Secret of Lawlessness.
Judaism and Freemasonry versus Christian Civilization. - Moscow,
1998, page 109)
In many cases they availed themselves of the accusations of
ritual murders soberly and prudently. S. Resnick, who has
researched the bistory of blood libel in detail, writes:
"The schemes were well developed. An ordinary Christian child
crucified or killed by other means excites the crowd and causes a
pogrom during which ... the Christians succeed in making a good
profit. Later the authorities intervene. They calm down the crowd...
and impose an indemJlity on the Jewish community. When little of
this is found, they expel the Jews, having robbed them blind. A
simple and reliable method to supplement the emptied treasury of a
landlord, monastery or kingdom".
Tales of man-eating Jews who kidnapped youths, in order to
revel in Christian blood in the secret ceremonies of their "Basurman"
religion, were part of the comciousness of the peoples of Europe.
Rumor ascribed to the Jews special diseases and properties from
which they were able to be saved only with the help of Christian
blood. According to these legends, Jewish women in childbirth
were not able to be delivered without the help of Christian blood;

411
their children were born blind, and in order to regain their sight,
they also supposedly required Christian blood. It too was needed
for the marriage ceremony and for the rite which was performed
over a dying Jew; in order that wild boar's tusks and ears didn't
grow in them; even La stop menstruation in Jewish men, which
supposedly was peculiar to them the same as even to women. And,
but of course, the most wide-spread rumor was repeated over and
over again about the unleavened Passover bread, into which the
Jews supposedly mix Christian blood. (5. Resnick. "Blood Libel
in Russia", Washington, 1999).
But even this, in our view, does not fully clarify the reasons
and incllrability of anti-Semitism. The history of mankind knows
quite a number of wars in which the enemies committed
inconceivable atrocities in relation to cach other. Nonetheless, in
the historical memory of peoples, who at some time have suffered
huge losses during battles and in years of lawlessness, there is no
chronic hatred. No one takes revenge on the heirs of former enemies,
experiences jealousy and alarm, and having seen them, calls on
fellow citizens for the destruction of the "strangers~. Only the
Jews alone are favored with such all hOllOr.
Modern psychoanalysis gives a persuasive explanation for this
phenomenon. It has revealed that human consciousness brcaks up
and replaces unpleasant memories.
Here is a typical syndrome described in psychiatric textbooks.
A faLher, overall an e.asy-tempered man, while drinking
whiskey, lit a cigar and treated his son roughly and cruelly.
When the son had grown, and his father has died, the son with
trepidation began to rcact to his memory, in many respects
exaggerating the father's aclions. The unpleasant memories have
been crushed completely and sincerely. Howevcr, with the smell
of cigar smoke asthmatic spasms and the on·set of asphyxia started
in him. Treatment with medicines has not helped, and thcn the
psychiatrists, while doing a checkup, ascertain that in lhe son's
consciousness the memorics of the real father were split: the
"good. father was idealizcd, and the .bad~ replaced and
displaccd into the subconscious. And it reacted to cigar smoke.
A further developmcnt of this scientific course which is called
ncofreudism, has led to the discovery that something similar happens
with social memory.
One can contend, with complete seriousness, that memories of
412
the real empire of the Israelites, in many respects cruel and ruthless,
have been split in the consciousness of European society into a
good hundred idealized stories and one displaced memory. Among
the versions, according to the reasons for the events of those years,
our historical memory has brought into the world the "ancient
Roman", "Byzantine", "ancient Greek", "ancient Judaic", "ancient
Russian", "Mongolian", '4ancient Chinese" and some other
histories. In which connection, as already was shown, they are
idealized, that is, they are distinguished by the brilliant heroism of
the partici pants of the events, by their nobility, by the pure feelings,
by fearlessness in the struggle for justice and the like. Chroniclers
and historians have called and call the ancient times the "Golden
Age", when both people were supposedly better and life considerably
more interesting.
The very role of the '4cigart in the public memory has fallen to
Judaism.
Taking after Freud, S. Resnick emphasiZes that the legend of
the "use of Christian blood" is nothing other than the transfer to
the Jews of an anti-Semite's own secret longings.
"Christianity has condemned human sacrifice as a terrible sin,
but the atavistic inclination for orgies of blood has not disappeared.
It has been suppressed, displaced into the subconscious. And
afterwards it was carried over to the Jews" ... <5. ReslIick, The
Seduction of Hatred. 8100d Libel ill Russia. Daat/Znarlie Publishers,
Moscow-Jerosalem, 200 1).
Thus, at the root of anti-Semitism, in our view, lies the displaced
memory of mankind about the cruel and bloody features of the
first empire of monotheists.
The facts connected with the cardinal question: when did
Anti-Semitism arise? Testify, in particular, to the validity of OUf
approach to this phenomenon.
lndeed, did it exist until the Middle Ages? The author of the
well-known work, "A History of Anti·Semitism", Leon Poliakov,
thinks that anti-Semitism arose in the Hellenistic era, and is dated
by the period of Alexander the Great's campaigns to the 30s of our
era. The first manifestations of anti-Jewish sentiments are observed,
in his opinion, in the city of Alexandria.
V. lIiushenko, an Orthodox historian, author of numerous
articles about the mutual relations of Christianity and Judaism,
holds another view:

413
 "Anti-Semitism existed before Christianity. It has a pagan
origin. And it is connected with the fact that Judaism, which the
Jews professed, is a monotheistic religion, it opposed the pagan
polytheism in a natural way. The facts of Jewish pogroms were
well known as early as the first century B.C. in Alexandria".
As we see, the opinions agree on one thing: the first pogroms
supposedly took place in ancient Alexandria. The assertion of V.
Iliushenko, irreproachable in its logic, is cheapened by the reference
to this Egyptian city. And here is why. That which arc the "facts
of the Jewish pogroms were well known as early as the first century
B.C.", is based on documents composed in the Middle Ages, as
demonstrated by the adherents of the new chronology. Not a
single original of these documents has been preserved. Their
appearance itself testifies to massive forgeries: they only appeared
when the monarchs, bishops or noble grandees ordered them.
Thus it happened, for example, with the speeches and letters
of Cicero, which no one kllew before the Middle Ages. And, you
see, in them are very sharp anti-Semitic expressions which are
used to this day:
"You know, Laelius, what kind of a gang this is, how they
hold together, what influence they exert on the meetings. Therefore,
I will speak in a low voice in order that only the judges can hear
me, because many people will be found who are ready to set this
crowd on me and on every respectable man, and we don't want to
make this easier" ...
"The Jews are spread over the whole earth, scattered among
the residents of a multitude of countries". "There is neither one
city of the Hellenes and not one of the barbarian people where our
custom of celebration of the Sabbath, fasting and lighting of candles
would not have penetrated," writes Josephus Flavius supposedly
at the start of the new era.
Meanwhile, as the adherents of the new chronology have shown,
there is evidence of the fact that his compositions were written
after the sailing of Christopher Columbus.
Max Weber is categorical:
"The universal propagation of "anti-Semitism' in antiquity
is a fact".
Theodor Mommsen maintains:
4From Horace's slight mockeries of the obsessive Jews from
the Roman ghetto it was a huge step to the absolute hatred of

414
Tacitus for these fiends of a humankind, for whom everything
clean is unclean, and all that is unclean is clean" ... ("Roman
History", volume V).
The hatred of Tacitus is not the least classical. Tacitus himself
appeared at that time when it had become necessary to have all
ancient history of an arising Germany. So then, in the 151h century,
the Roman Pope, Leo X (really the 10th ?) publishes TacticlIs's
"Gcnmmy", which there and then becomes the foundation of German
history which was unknown to anyone before that. As early as 1425,
the papal secreblry, Peggio Braceiolini, a well+known Italian forger of
"ancient" works, ordered this production in the German Hershfeld
monastery. In 1455, the manuscript was,finally,brought into Italy by
a certain Alberto d'Ascoli. The popes did not decide to publish the
remake for dozens of years, and when, at last, they did decide, they
immediately destroyed the original of the manuscri pt. The inquisition
after some time makes short work of one of d'Ascoli's descendants.
Probably, they were destroying the last traces of the fraud.
Up to now, no one has attempted to explain how Tacticus's
manuscri pt came to be in a German monastery, how it was preserved
there 1,500 years and why they had not used it all this time. (
Dr. Lucas Bras-i, Ocr gro5le Schwindcl. Bausteine (br cine wahre
Gcschichte der Antike. 195j).
That which is "ancient anti-Semitism" is in fact a tracing of
the anti-Semitism of a completely different era, and by implication
the traditional historians recognize themselves, and even everyone,
who for some kind of reasons is involved with this problem. True,
they arc expressed carefully, using words of the type "surprisingly",
"strangely enough .. , "mysteriously", and the like. But the essence
remains the following:
"Antiquity in intcrrelations with the Jews demonstrates to us
the fC<l.tures, which sometimes surprisingly arc reminiscent of a new
time, even the last century or the las! decades... The princi pal factors
which define even now the sit.uation of "JewIY" already were present
in antiquity".
So writes Igor Shafarevich, who stands 011 the side of
"moderate" anti-Semitism.
One of the most surprising peculiarities of the persecutions
consists of the fact that they have born, so to speak, a cyclical
nature. Periods of persecutions where replaced by invitations to
the Jews to return to the countries from where they were expelled.

415
 Characteristic in this regard is England, whcre a broad
discussion of the merits of Judaism and its tonsequences preceded
their return. The preacher and theologian, John Toland, who is
called the "first free thinker in the history of the West," in
connection with persecutions against the Jews even brought an
accusation against the fathers of the church of the distortion of the
original Christian teachings C'Nazaiclls, a Jewish, Gentile and
Mahometan Christianity" (1718):
"... the true Christianity of the Jews was suppressed as a result
of the actions of the much more numerous heathens who did not
endure the simplicity and full agreement with the reason of this
Jewish Christianity... Thanks to that very same heathen tradition,
veneration of the saints, prayers for the dead, the worshi p of icons
and other manifestations of Greek and Roman superstitions were
introduced, not the least trace of which it is impossible to find
anywhere in the Bible".
A brave assertion for the start of the 18th century.
In the work, ., Arguments in Favor of the Naturalization of
Jews in Great Britain and Ireland", John Toland assures his readers
of the fact that a significant part of them have Jewish blood in
their veins. This especially concerns the Scots, "which is the reason
for which numerous residents of this part of the island experience
a significant aversion to pork and blood pudding, while not
speaking of some other easily noticed coincidences".
It is funny to read that Jewish blood flows in the veins of
Scots. It is much more serious to presume that in the Scots a bias
toward pork has remained since the times of the empire of the
monotheists! But we arc getting into details already. The main
thing in the other, in Toland's opinion, is t.he Jews need to return to
England.
Why? John Toland, as too many other authors, insists on special
Jewish abilities, which were claimed again by yesterday's thugs
and murderers.
A weak basis. The heirs of the imperial publicans and money-
lenders did not possess any kind of special economic and financial
talents, without which those drivcn out of a cowltry, in particular,
England, almost perished. There were no such talents, even as
there wasn't even a Jewish nation itself.
Then nations generally didn't exist in the modern meaning of
this word. People defined themselves according to beliefs. When

416
Jesus Christ said that "there is neither Greek nor Jew" before the
Most High, he didn't have in mind Jews and Greeks as nations, as
it is understood now by the popular perception. By Jews in the
Gospels they have in mind the followers of the teachings of Moses,
that is monotheists, and by Greeks ~ pantheists, the heathens who
recognize polytheism. Not an ethnic, but a religious classification
of the population held sway.
This tradition has been maintained in many countries to now.
In Jewry itself, deeply believing people even up to the present time
think Jews only are those who religiously obey the instructions of
the Torah. Therefore, a non-believer for them is not a Jew, even if
all his forefathers were faithful Jews.
But they unconditionally recognize as jews, for example, native
Russian peasants from the Smolensk, Astrakhan and Voronezh areas
of Russia who professed Judaism as early as the second century.
Instead of "nation" in the historical sources are met the
expressions "Gennanic tribes. (for example, the Angles, Saxons, Francs
and Goths), the "Slavonic tribes" (the Krivichj, Policni, Drevliani,
and Vyatichi), the "Iberian tribes" (the Picts, Basques, Turdetans,
Torduls) and so on. The common word "tribes" here is accompanied
by definitions of the "Germanic", "Slavonic", and ~Iberian". But
the are the ideas equivalent that are contained in these definitions
to the idea of "nation"?
The first edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica (Edjoburgh,
t 771) maint.1.ins that the word Gennan meant even as early as the
18th century "half-blooded, a relative by blood," that is, of the same
tribe. The word gennan generally still didn't have the meaning
"German as nation" at that time. By this definition, "ancient
Gemlans" are any community of people who adhere to a clan-tribal
structure of interrelations which is based on a blood relationshj p.
Any tribe, for example, Slavonic - the same as Gennans, as also Saxons,
Sweves and Cimbri. In the Spanish language, for example, the word
hennano even today means .. brother. and henllana is "sister".
Once we have touched upon the etymology of the names of
tribes and nations, we shall clarify what "Jew" means. According to
the research of Emile Benveniste, a first-ratc modem expert in these
questions, "Jew", besides "stranger" means the same thing that "Hun"
and "Tatar" and "Turk" mean. They express the idea of a "mixed
people" in various languages. And today there is the international
word hybrid (English hybrid "dissimilar, mixed", Italian ibrido).

417
Jews (English Hebrew - they themselves are Iberian) - this is a
mixed population in the ethnic sense of the medieval Mediterranean
Sea, according to Father Alexander Men, a "Mediterranean Sea race",
and by no means Jews in the modern sense.
Nations and peoples were formed only after the fact as states
rose on the ruins of the empire. They are the produce of the historical
development of recent centuries! And only the Scaligerian
chronology has allowed transferring to the depths of the centuries
the realities of the newest times and to declare peoples as ancient,
and others supposedly as young. We all are from the same time.
Traditional history, of course, does not agree with this. lL thinks
that the formation of peoples was in accordance with a plan that
was clearly prescribed in the march of Moses: they left from some
kind of region for anoUler region, conquered the aboriginals of that
place, organized a state in the new place headed by some ruler, lived
through a period of flourishing and eventually became aboriginals
for new conquerors. Thus did the ancient "ethnos" appear and
disappear, and circles of human civilization replaced each other,
while being elevated according to the Marxist spiral supposedly all
the way to the 17th century, when, at last, modern nations were
formed by the labors of the humanists.
Here is such a plan which was highlighted as early as in the
Old Testament, according to which the whole Scaligerian chronology
was constructed. In it, it would seem, even the history of the Jews
is confined. However, how does one explain the fact that they do
not disappear? From all the other "most ancient ethnoi" only names
remain, but Jews continue to remain in this world. An inexplicable
anomaly. Just as, in the best case, is "the riddle of the historical
process"; in the worst are the "intrigues of Satan".
But let us relurn to the questions of just what the secret of the
return of the Jews to one or the other country is. It consisted, above
all, of their (inmlcial and trade connections. No persecutions were
able to extirpate the traditions of the former imperial caste, the solidarity
of its members, professionals in financial spheres, their mutual aid
and support. Their connections ranged to all countries, regardless of
borders and distances. They knew that without economic and
financial interaction with neighbors not one state can exist, and
therefore, sooner or later their experience, skills and their business
contacts again will be needed. And when they invited them, they
returned to continue their business. It is clear, with a great advantage

418
for themselves. There is no place for unselfishness in business.
"The chimerical nationality of the Jew is the nationality of a
merchant, generally of a man of means. Money is the jealous god
of Israel, in the face of which there is not supposed to be any other
god" (Karl Marx).
The Jews were also extremely useful as skilled craftsmen,
experienced physicians, musicians, naturalists and even simply a
literate people.
In the conditions of persecutions they, essentially, trusted only
their own and preferred to carry all business mainly with their
own. In this is one of the chief reasons for the ineradicability of
Judaism, whjch is connected with the caste's code. Its moral scmdards,
rules of behavior and rituals, language and extemal attributes have
served as infallible guidelines in the recognition of their own.
The Russian historian, Vladimir Soloviev wrote:
besides a passion for money, the Jews also have another
II •••

peculiarity: the strong unity of all of them in the name of a cornman

faith and a common law... Both all Israel, and every family in it...
they are penetrated to the depths of the soul and to the marrow of
the bones with the sense and consciousness of their own national,
familial and personal 1" .•. (Vladimir Soloviev "The Jews and the
Christian Question" J.
One doesn't pretend it possible to agree with the historian.
Everything about which Vladimir Soloviev wrote is inherent not to
a nation. There is nowhere in the world a nation, all the members of
which equally would be "penetrated with the sense and
consciousness of their own national, familial and personal I." A
nation is not an army which lives according to military regulations.
And the fact that a disci plinc,comparable with military, was inherent
to the Jews in many ways serves as another proof of its caste roots.
One may compare it with the nobility in the era of the medieval
flowering of this class. To be a noble by blood or by the grace of a
king was considered the higbest honor, although it also applied
extremely tough limitations aD behavior and dictated everythjng,
right up to the point of how to dress, how to travel (only on
horseD and how to treat the common people, who deserved only
arrogant and scornful treatment. It is enough to read a number of
places in the Talmud in order to feel a truly floblemall's attitude
of lhe Jews to those who believe otherwise. Haughtiness and
contempt for the "Goyem" are in excess there.

419
 The founding fathers of the modern state of Israel have felt
perfectly the cliquishness of the Jews. One of them has talked
about the fact that he dreams of a time when their own criminals,
prostitutes and prisons will be in Israel. And then it will be a
normal state, the same as all the rest. In other words, not a caste.
The dreams of the founding fathers have been realized in full.
Israel exists, and the Jewish people live there. And it has prisons,
prostitutes, drug addicts and gays. As all people have. The times
of the caste and its global role in the world have ended.
The main reasons for the formation of this people, in our view,
was the colossal external pressureon theJews and thecastedisci pline
in their midst. This process was concluded by the crcation of the
state of lsrael.
The role of anti~Semitism in the unity of the Jews more than once
has been underscored by the founders and ideologists of Zionism.
Theodor Herzl, the founder of Zionism, wrote in his diary:
"Anti·Semitcs will be our most reliable friends, and anti-Semitic
countries - our allies" (Patai, 1960, volume 1, page 84).
Dr. Arthur Ruppin thought: "Although it is impossible to
maintain that anti~Semitism alone contributed to the rise of
Zionism, but at least in Western Europe anti~Semitism is the
strongest agitator for Zionistic affairs. Anti·Semitism, having
perished, would have carried even Zionism behind it to the grave"
("Jews o[ the Preselltp Jewish Publishing House, Cologne, 1911,
page 278).
Dr. Leo Wertheimer wrote in his book published in 1918,
"Anti~Semitism and the Jews": "Anti·Semitism is the savior angel
of the Jews, it takes care that the Jews remain Jews... Anti~Semites
have aroused the Jewish consciousness in many Jews who didn't
want to have it" (Quotation [rom the book: "Dr. Franz Sheidl.
"Israel - Dream and Reality" Vienna, 1962, page 18).
Noam Goldman said in his welcoming speech at the Worldwide
Jewish Congress on 23July, 1958, in Geneva: "When anti·Semitism
in its classical form disappeared, this improved the material and
political position of Jewish communities throughout the whole
world, but it also rendered a negative influence on our inner life...
Our people know how to fight heroically in bad times, buy still
have not learned to live constructively in good times" (New York
Times, 24 July 1958).
Profcssor Jeshua Goldman declared at the 26th conference of

420
the Worldwide Zionist Organization in Israel on 30 December
1964: "The greatest danger for the Jews and Jewish unity is the
absence of anti-Semitism" (Franz Sheidl, op.cit., page 18)
All these pronouncements are used by anti-Semites for evidence
of the artificiality, even the illegitimacy of the appearance of the
Jewish nation and its state. But with the closest examination, it
turns out that all st<ltes and the overwhelming majority of peoples
of the world have gone through stages of violent, and this means,
artificial unification! In the relatively distant past these are the
English, French, Spanish and Italians who have lived through
severe unifying wars. In more recent times - Russia, Germany
and China. All states and nations of North and South America
were formed by no me,ans in a natural course.
BlIt let us return to the Jews.
One of the most popular legends about Jews is connected
with their supposed attempt to predominate in the world. All
anti-Semitism, in essence, is supported by this. There is no special
need to enumerate in detail the works on this subject: It is enough
to recall "The Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion," the reference
book for anti-Semites of all countries. It already had been shown
long ago that it is a forgery, created for the basis of persecutions of
the Jews. Its authors have been revealed, the sources analyzed
scrupulously that were used by the compilers of the "Protocols",
and all the absurdities and stupidities made by them have been
pointed out. However, nothing is injurious to the book's
popularity. It responds to the U71conscious feeling of jealousy and
alarm that people experience, haVing heard the word "Jew".
As regards the predominance of Jews in the world, that, in our
opinion, the anti-Semites are somewhat right, while not knowing it,
obviously, themselves. The descendants of the monotheist Jews really
do rule the world. But only it isn't those who live in Israel. It is a
question of the royal, tsarist, princely and similar dynasties, both in
Europe and in Asia and North Africa. It is common knowledge that
they are connected with each other by old kindred ties and that
many of them are proud of their legendary origin from the family of
King David ,md his dist<lnt descendant Jesus Christ. In particular,
as we already have said, the memory has been maintained in such a
mythological form of the affiliation of their ancestors to the ruling
elite of the empire of the Israelites.
However paradoxical it is, in relation to other peoples the Jews

421
fulfill that very same function that anti-Semitism is in relation to
the Jcws. The political scientist Alexander Verkhovsky spoke about
this very precisely, in our view, in a recent lcclure at the University
of Sussex (2003), which was devoted to nationalism:
"An enemy is the most necessary part of any nationalistic
concept, but a defined hierarchy of enemies is better. In this sense,
it is simpler for orthodox nationalists since the main Enemy was
known in advance - it is the Anti-Christ. And there is a rich
tradition of describing the enemies subordinate to it - the Jews,
Catholics, etc".
It is fine if the enemy is invisible and ubiqUitous. Then the
human imagination will fill out its form with such horrific details
that no additional propaganda will be needed. Poople will be flocking
together, ready for everything for the sake of its annihilation. And
then not even is an open appeal enough, but a hint at the fact that
those who believe otherwise are to blame for everything, so that the
throngs under common, most often - national, banners rush to
annihilate them, believing that as a result a heavenly life will ensue.
As the researchers of various countries note, in the later Middle
Ages, the European question fell into the context of the concept of
progress. This concept became a sccular reflection of religious
concepts of a coming Heavenly Kingdom on Earth. The inquisitive
minds of Europe developed various plans of social order which
could put an end to injustice, oppression, poverty and the lawlessness
of poople. They believed that it is possible to transform the world
according to a thoroughly considered plan. The main thing is to
prOVide for and count everything.
It was Utopia. Usually, when they speak about Utopia, they
have in mind socialistic ideals. However, an absolute monarchy
became the first such Utopia. The works of prominent philosophers
and the statesmen of that time are well known, in which exceptional
value and the need for the power of an absolute monarch was
proven for society's progress (Niccolo Machiavelli: "The Prince,"
1469-1527). For the Jews, the remains of the caste of the olt!
empire, there was no place, naturally, in this Utopia. And
persecutions of them intensified repeatedly.
Then the Utopism of the nation arrived to replace the Utopian
monarchy. It was especially popular in the 18~t9th centuries
(William Pitt the Elder (1708-1778), when modern nations and
countries were being formed. Its main distingUishing feature became

422
the assertion that the state should be mononational. A rapid and
quite often violent abrasion of differences between peoples
inhabiting the British Isles, between Swabians and Prussians in
Germany and Ukrainians, Byelorussians and Russian in Russia
proceeded ... And here again they were imposed on the Jcws, who
did not wish to be joined into the nation-building process.
National Utopism began to exhaust itself toward the middle
of the 19 lh century. It had become clear that the creation of nations
docs not solve the most acute social problems. And then social
Utopia appeared in the first plan - to build a society of justice,
where all are equal, outside of the dependence on nationality. (Karl
Marx and Frederick Engels). It brought mankind the greatest
losses and sufferings, inasmuch as one can create such a society
only while destroying enormous masses of people who do not
correspond to the criteria of the new teachings. It is enough to
recall if nothing else the October Revolution of 1917 in Russia,
where they shot hundreds of thousands of citizens only because
they thought other than as the Bolsheviks prescribed. For the
seven decades of the existence of the Soviet Union the number of
those repressed there numbered in the millions. The mass
repressions didn't cease for even a year in all the countries that
entered toward the middle of the 20t~ century into the "world of
socialism". It was possible to compel the people to live according
to the contrived programs exclusively by force.
Jews playcd the most active role in attempts to realize the social
Utopia everywhere. And this gcnerously fed anti-Semitism. The
American author, Douglas Reed, in the book "The Controversy of
Zion" wrote that the .primitive tribes from the distant interiors of
Africa", against whom "natioB<\1 animosity was so strong that to
assuage it turned out to be iml>ossible" led the revolution of 1917 in
Russia. Thus did Douglas Reed explain and justify that during the
civil war in Russia both the Whites, followers of the overthrown
tsar, and the Reds, the Bolsheviks, destroyed Jewish townshi ps.
Many researchers see a reason for the revolutionary sentiments
of the Jews in the fact that Jewish communities in Eastern Europe
were in distress. Douglas Reed thought that the Jews themselves
were to blame for their poverty. In his opinion, they violently
resisted any attempts to improve their situation, maintaining it
"for reasons of the arrangement of revolutions and world wars"
("The Controversy of Zion").
423
 Later it became clear that it is impossible here, on Earth, to
create a kingdom of universal happiness. Something or someone
will interfere. Some kind of enemies will upset the apple cart.
And then a new anti-Semitism evolved, which accuses the Jews of
the collapse of the worldwide Communist experiment.
The Italian writer Umberto Eco, as too other authors,
distinguishes religious, popular and "intellectual" anti~Semitism.
He writes:
"Religious anti-Semitism, undoubtedly, bore the responsibility
for popular: after all, the fact that the Jews were the people who
killed God, justified the pogroms... But underneath "intellectual"
anti-SemiLism I have in mind a theory, which is based on historical
and anthropological arguments, which is set in the superiority of
the Aryan race over the Jewish, and the political doctrine of the
Jewish conspiracy for the conquest of the Christian world, which
most fully is presented in the 'Protocols of the Zionist Wise Men'.
It is also a product of the European secular 'intelligentsia"'.
"Intellectual. anti-Semitism, in his opinion, is born at the end
of the 18th - st.trt of the 19th centuries in Italy and France. 10
particular in France, by an irony of fate, the old seat of Catharism,
with which the Judilic first inquisition struggled, they get the
developmenL of a theory of racism or ethnic roots of civilization, the
theory of a Jewish conspiracy is developed which is responsible
from the stalt for the mistakes of the French revolution, and afterwards
for intrigues for the purpose of subjugating the Christian world.
Racist theories also bloomed like a magnificent flower in the
Russia of lhe 19 111 - start of lhe 20 th century. The Russian
predecessors of the German Nazis wrote:
"It is necessary to understand that racial characteristics have
delimited the .Jewish people so grc<\tly from all of mankind that
they have made of them completely special creatures who cannot
be part of our notion of human nature. We can examine them as we
examine and study animals, we can feci aversion and dislike toward
them, as we fcel toward a hycna, toward a jackal or spider" ...
Alexander Arkadievich Stolypin. "New Times", 1911,5 October).
Another publicist, he himself a clergyman, Pavel Florenskiy
thought that equality of peoples was thought up by the Jews in
order to "take advantage of us". Altogether they wrote that all
religions afe a vestige, for the purpose of "taking from us our strength
- our trust ... they la~lght us 'autonomous' morals in ordcr to take

424
away existing morality and instead to give us vulgarity ... The
weighty grain is for them, and the chaff is for us, the "cattle," in
their view." (Efim Kurganov. Pavel Florenskiy and the Jews.
"Russkiy Evrey" , 1999, Volume 2 (t 1), pages 22-24J.
It further tums out that now there is not one people in the
world that is completely free of Jewish blood. Every people with
every year increases the percentage of Jewish blood, that is it is
rarefied in their own distinctive character. "The percentage of
Jewish blood in all peoples will be so significant, that this blood
finally will drown out any other blood, eat it as acid eats paint...
Even an insignificant drop of Jewish blood ... will impart to all
the structure of the soul the die and the stamp of the Jews".
So wrote a Christian clergyman.
Thus, the waves of anti-Semitism are all the more drastic and
merciless than the more acute social and political problems in one
or the other society. In such periods the chronic paranoiac
relationship to Jews, which has become part of the social
consciousness, automatically suggests to people who are in a
severe material and moral situation who is to blame for their
misfortunes. The greatest persecutions of the Jews, the most
misanthropic appeals and pronouncements we observe in the
decades, are a turning point for one or the other country.
In order to make certain of this, it is enough to recall when in
particular anti-Semites raised and raise the banners of their own
predecessors, it would seem, surely buried in the depth of the
centuries. The most recent examples: in France it is the second
half of the 19th century, in Russia - the start of the 20th century,
before the First World War and the October Revolution, and
in Germany - after the First World War.
Psychologists and political scientists connect this with a common
phenomenon which bas received the name Weimar Complex. It
existed long before the start of the 20lh century, but is known as
Weimar because in particular in Gennany, which was beat in the First
World War, it developed especially distinctly. The complex is based
on the humiliation and feeling of inferiority, and also on the wish to
restore greatness and to take revenge on enemies. But, the first enemy,
as is well known, is the Jews. And Hitlerism started from it.
Now a paranoiac relationship to the Jews is observed especially
distinctly in post-Soviet Russia and the Arab world, where social
and economic antagonisms are extremely acute.

425
 The Jews are perceived as Russia's main cnemy and of
Orthodoxy in general. An important feature of the Jew as enemy
is the fact that he invisibly stands for all the other visible enemies.
The control of the Jews over the United States or over the worldwide
financial system is commonplace. And they control the press:
"The strongest weapon in the arms of the Zionists is their
control over all means of information" ("The Controversy of Zion").
The Catholics also are under control of the Jews. Theorists of
anti-Semitism write today:
"The past years have clearly shown that the heretic Vatican
has become the main tool of the godless Israel in the affair of "the
J udaisation of Christianity". What is morc.
"both the Catholics and the Jews are wailing for the same
Messiah," that is the Antichrist.
Even the most ardent Russian anli-Semite - nco-heathens -
submit to the Jews:
"As regards the appearance of neoheathenislic, although anti-
Zionist books, that is of no surprise, since those very same Zionists
are imposing the neobeathenism" ...
"Beyond the explosions of the rockets in Afghanistan it almost
is not heard how beneath the AI-Aks mosque with the labor intensity
of ants they are working on the reconstruction of the third temple,
where the Antichrist is supposed to be enthroned. (Telecast
"Russian Home", Moscow, 8 November 2001).
The old anti-Semitism hated the Jews. The new considers
Jewish everything that it hates. They no longer seck on the basis
of blood. As one of the most typical Russian Clnti-Semites, General
Albert Makashov, said: "Yid is not a nationality, and not every
Jew is a Yid. A bad person of any nationality ... he is called a
Yid".
The orthodox Moslems also sec in the Jews the cause of the
most serious economic and political gaps of their countries. They
rely on the anti-Jewish sura in the Koran. According to the
sacred book of the J\1oslems, for example, those of the Jews "who
have not come to believe are in Gehenna's fire, residing there
eternally. They are the worst of creatures".
As a political ideology, Islamic fundamentalism declares war on
modern Western democratic values as Jewish. This sounds like: the
core of democratic society consists of the fact that the "Jews...
could indulge in debauchery, lie and cheat without problems".
426
 Another author writes: "Anyone who tears the umma (Moslem
society) from its religion and the Koran can be only a Jewish
agent - Willingly or unwillingly, independent of origin.
The situation is repeated with modern Christian anti-
Semitism: everything that is hated is proclaimed as Jewish.
The sentiments of Moslem radicals in Chechnia, one of Russia's
autonomous republics, are typical, where a bloody war has been going
on for some years between the central authorities and the orthodox
of the Wah habit type. After a temporary victory of the separatists
in 1996~1999, Chechnia became, strangely enough, a region of
prevailing anti-Semitism. There were practically no Jews in
Chechnia. Nonetheless, the rebels announced that "the Chechens
have become the victim of the worldwide Zionist conspiracy" and
that "the Jews are killing the Moslems with the hands of the stupid
Russians" .
The incursion of the Islamists into Dagestan the summer of 1999
was proclaimed by its initiators as the continuation of the struggle
not with Russians, but with "worldwide Zionism", and the final goal
of the war that was starting was called "the liberation of Jernsalem".
(According to the materials of the Moscow Bureau for the
Rights of Man: www,(JllsweriIl0~islam.oro ill the sections
Muhammad and his Enemies, Islam & Terrorism).
Nowadays in Europe, blood libel no longer enjoys popularity.
Instead in the Moslem world, in the masses of illiterate peasants and
tradesmen, it has received broad dissemination. In which connection
this phenomenon is in particular of our time. When in 1840, the so-
called "Damascus Nfain· arose, the Jews of Damascus were accused
of the murder not of a mullah, but of a Christian Capuchin. Christians
introduced blood libel into the Moslem world.
Today their help is no longer necessary for the Islamic radicals.
The Moslems believe blood libel unconditionally, especially since
people who are considered respectable learned men speak and write
about it. Thus, a professor of the Korolevskiy University AI Dammam
(Saudi Ar,lbia), Doctor Umaima Akhmad al-Jalama, tells his listeners
that during the Purim holiday the Jews prepare special dishes, which
are mixed of human blood. He describes with relish how they
obtain this blood: they shove a non~Jewish child, a Moslem or a
Christian, into a barrel, which is studded within with nails. They
granulate the blood received, hand it over to a "Jewish priest," and
he prepares hamcntaschen cookies and presents them to the
427
parishioners. They, tasting the cookies, get drunk on wine until
they lose human appearance and have sexual orgies in the synagogues.
("Al-Riad" newspaper, 10-12 March 2004)
The procession of anti-Semitism continues. No one knows, per
se, how to curb it. Many set hopes on an increase of society's
education: the marc pt."Ople there will be with upper and secondary
education, that is with more developed intellect and culture, the
less room wilt remain for nationalistic prejudices.
Life, however, convinces about the other. In all countries, the
representatives of the intell igentsia are the most uncompromising
anti-Semites. They are those who write the books, publish the
newspapers, teach the children in the schools and lecture on the
.Zionist wise men". They themselves create the nationalistic
organjzations and establish the international connections with like--
thinkers. Solid financial circles in dozens of countries are their
support. So, an overall upgrade in the level of culture and education,
alas, will not help.
In our view, the problem is not in the education as it is and
not in the culture, but in their content. Anti-Semitism, as we have
been assured, is based on myths connected with the postulates of
traditional history. And one needs to begin with these postulates.
The light at the end of the anti-Semitic tunnel will begin to appear
when scbool children study not the myths and legends about the
past of their peoples, but authentic history. It is full of cruelty
and sufferings, and one cannot always be proud of it. But it allows
one to see who is who in this world. The better means of persuasion
is historical truth. It is too bad that not all require it.

428